Denial of Access as an Unmeasured Outcome in Nonprescription Statin Self-Selection Studies
- 1Krafted Therapeutics Inc.
Abstract
BackgroundFive nonprescription statin attempts have failed; a sixth attempt, under the FDAs 2025-issued Additional Condition for Nonprescription Use (ACNU) pathway, is under way. Self-selection evidence is evaluated by whether ineligible consumers are excluded; how often eligible consumers are denied has never been reported.
ObjectiveTo quantify denial of access to eligible consumers across the published self-selection record.
MethodsSecondary analysis of the three published United States self-selection studies (SELECT, CREST, TACTiC), the FDA guidance, and four advisory committees questions and votes. We recomputed diagnostic accuracy from published cross-tabulations, derived TACTiCs prespecified unmitigated endpoints, and compared access strategies by decision curve analysis.
ResultsThe guidances endpoints contain no measure of denial, and every committee question addressing a selection error concerns admission of the ineligible. CRESTs sensitivity was 59.0% (95% CI 42.1%-74.4%), 29.5 percentage points below its reported positive predictive value; 41% of clinician-eligible participants were not approved. TACTiCs reference standard reached only application-approved consumers; none of the 10,332 rejected was assessed; sensitivity is inestimable and its prespecified unmitigated endpoints, 84.2% and 80.9% against the published mitigated 90.7% and 98.1%, remain unpublished. Decision curve analysis favors the application over both alternatives across reasonable thresholds at the sample prevalence.
ConclusionsFor nonprescription statin applications, the self-selection evidence framework counts errors of admission and leaves errors of denial unmeasured; its public health objective, fewer eligible adults untreated, cannot be evaluated on evidence counting only admissions. Four design and reporting changes, none requiring new methodology, would let the next application measure it.
Related
- The right measure for the right question: A framework for domain‐matched patient‐reported outcome measure selection in knee arthroplasty research
- Laxative use after cardiac arrest: exposure timing, treatment selection, and outcome interpretation
- Outcome indicators used in recovery college effectiveness studies: a scoping review
- Performance-Based Versus Informant-Reported IADL in Dementia: A Person-Environment-Occupation Perspective for Occupational Therapy Outcome Selection.
- Development of a Core Outcome Measurement Set for studies of community pharmacist-led medication reviews in older patients with multimorbidity and polypharmacy
BibTeX
@misc{molinari2026denial,
title = {{Denial of Access as an Unmeasured Outcome in Nonprescription Statin Self-Selection Studies}},
author = {K. P. Molinari},
howpublished = {medRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = sep,
doi = {10.64898/2026.09.06.26362346},
url = {https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.06.26362346v1},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Denial of Access as an Unmeasured Outcome in Nonprescription Statin Self-Selection Studies
AU - K. P. Molinari
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/09/06
PB - medRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.09.06.26362346
UR - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.09.06.26362346v1
AB - BackgroundFive nonprescription statin attempts have failed; a sixth attempt, under the FDAs 2025-issued Additional Condition for Nonprescription Use (ACNU) pathway, is under way. Self-selection evidence is evaluated by whether ineligible consumers are excluded; how often eligible consumers are denied has never been reported. ObjectiveTo quantify denial of access to eligible consumers across the published self-selection record. MethodsSecondary analysis of the three published United States self-selection studies (SELECT, CREST, TACTiC), the FDA guidance, and four advisory committees questions and votes. We recomputed diagnostic accuracy from published cross-tabulations, derived TACTiCs prespecified unmitigated endpoints, and compared access strategies by decision curve analysis. ResultsThe guidances endpoints contain no measure of denial, and every committee question addressing a selection error concerns admission of the ineligible. CRESTs sensitivity was 59.0% (95% CI 42.1%-74.4%), 29.5 percentage points below its reported positive predictive value; 41% of clinician-eligible participants were not approved. TACTiCs reference standard reached only application-approved consumers; none of the 10,332 rejected was assessed; sensitivity is inestimable and its prespecified unmitigated endpoints, 84.2% and 80.9% against the published mitigated 90.7% and 98.1%, remain unpublished. Decision curve analysis favors the application over both alternatives across reasonable thresholds at the sample prevalence. ConclusionsFor nonprescription statin applications, the self-selection evidence framework counts errors of admission and leaves errors of denial unmeasured; its public health objective, fewer eligible adults untreated, cannot be evaluated on evidence counting only admissions. Four design and reporting changes, none requiring new methodology, would let the next application measure it.
ER -