Sir,

I read with interest the above mentioned article.\[[@ref1]\] However, I had a few comments to make regarding the same. The method used to arrive at the particular sample size was not mentioned and neither was the power of the study. Some of the data mentioned in the written content did not correlate with the data that was mentioned in the graph. The authors mentioned that atorvastatin reduced LDL-C the most at a dose of 40 mg (15.9%). However, Table 3 clearly mentions that atorvastatin at a dose of 20 mg reduced LDL-C the most (21.2%). In Figure 1b, the footnote of the graph wrongly mentions microalbuminia instead of microalbuminuria.

As the authors had used the term cost-effectiveness in the study title, it would have been better if they had shed more light on the pharmacoeconomic analysis.\[[@ref2]\] They have solely mentioned the acquisition cost of rosuvastatin when compared to atorvastatin. A cost-effective analysis with the calculation of the Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio would have been more appropriate and insightful.
