Metabolic & Cardiometabolic
statins increases new-onset type 2 diabetes
In plain terms: Do statins increase the risk of developing type 2 diabetes?
Part of: 💊 statins
Yes, a real but modest effect: meta-analyses show roughly a 9-12% relative increase in new-onset diabetes, dose-dependent, and far outweighed by cardiovascular benefit in indicated patients.
📅 Last reviewed: 2026-07-14 ⓘ
Evidence ladder
How far up the ladder this claim has climbed. A high consensus on a low rung means "consistent so far," not "proven in people."
Top evidence so far: All trials, pooled (Meta-analysis)
How the studies fall
The evidence (11)
| Source | Grade | Stance | Quality | Finding |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lai KZH et al 2025 · study_type: observational | observational | supports | moderate | PROMISE longitudinal cohort (169/498 participants on statins, mainly rosuvastatin/atorvastatin, 9-year follow-up) found statin users had lower insulin sensitivity (5.3-6.4% reduction) and beta-cell function (4.9-7.6% reduction) versus non-u |
| Preiss 2011 · JAMA | meta-analysis | supports | high | Meta-analysis of 5 trials (32,752): intensive-dose vs moderate-dose statins raised new-onset diabetes (OR 1.12), establishing dose-dependence of the diabetes signal. |
| Lin JL et al 2026 · study_type: observational | observational | supports | moderate | Target-trial-emulation propensity-matched cohort (TriNetX) found PCSK9 inhibitors had significantly lower incident-T2DM risk than statins (HR 0.815, 95% CI 0.764-0.869) among hyperlipidemia patients. Using statins as the higher-risk active |
| Navarese 2013 · Am J Cardiol | meta-analysis | supports | high | Network meta-analysis of 17 RCTs (113,394 patients) found statins increased new-onset diabetes in a type- and dose-dependent manner (highest with rosuvastatin/atorvastatin). |
| Li 2025 · Cardiovasc Drugs Ther | meta-analysis | tested-null | moderate | Meta-analysis of statin adverse reactions across diseases quantified new-onset diabetes among the significant class effects. |
| Thakker 2016 · Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf | meta-analysis | supports | moderate | Network meta-analysis of RCTs confirmed a significant association between statin therapy and incident diabetes. |
| Sattar 2010 · Lancet | meta-analysis | supports | high | Collaborative meta-analysis of 13 trials (91,140 participants): statins raised new-onset diabetes 9% (OR 1.09); ~1 extra case per 255 patient-years — modest and outweighed by CV benefit. |
| Ridker 2008 (JUPITER) venue: N Engl J Med · N Engl J Med | RCT | supports | moderate | JUPITER: rosuvastatin showed a small but significant increase in physician-reported new-onset diabetes versus placebo, an early signal later confirmed by meta-analysis. |
| Park EJ et al 2026 · study_type: observational | observational | supports | low | Korean NHIS cohort of 29,826 ASCVD patients on secondary-prevention statins found 40% developed new-onset diabetes over 5 years, with rosuvastatin (HR 1.07), pravastatin (HR 1.19) and simvastatin (HR 1.15) showing higher risk than atorvasta |
| Albawa'neh 2025 · Ann Med | meta-analysis | mixed | low | Systematic review noting statins increase new-onset T2DM while assessing ezetimibe; an independent contemporary confirmation of the statin-diabetes signal. |
| Naci 2013 · Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes | meta-analysis | supports | high | Study-level network meta-analysis of 135 RCTs (246,955 participants) found statins as a class raised diabetes risk, with heterogeneity between individual agents. |
Disagree, or know a study we missed?
We grade by evidence, not opinions. The way to weigh in is to point us to a study we haven't cited (check the evidence table above first), or to flag a problem with one we have. Every submission is reviewed; if it holds up, the grade updates and shows in Science Changes Its Mind.
Opens a short form. You'll sign in with Google so submissions are tied to a real account — we don't display your identity, and we only accept a link we can verify (PubMed, DOI, ClinicalTrials.gov).
Educational only, not medical advice. Grades and scores reflect published evidence weighted by study design and quality; see the methodology.