Are statin medications safe in patients with ALS?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statin medications for elevated cholesterol are one of the most commonly prescribed medications worldwide. The aim of this study was to determine if statin medications affect the rate of disease progression, the severity and frequency of muscle cramping, and serum CK levels in patients with ALS. We conducted a prospective cohort study in patients diagnosed with ALS with statin medication as the predetermined exposure variable and the rate of decline of the ALS Functional Rating Scale-Revised (ALSFRS-R) as the primary outcome. One hundred and sixty-four consecutive patients with laboratory supported probable, clinically probable, or clinically definite ALS were evaluated from January 2006 to September 2007. Thirty-two patients (20%) were taking statin medications and 132 were in the control group. After adjusting for covariates, we found a highly significant increase in the rate of decline in the ALSFRS-R for the statin group (1.71 units/month) compared to the control group (1.05 units/month, pB0.0001) representing a 63% increase in the rate of functional decline. Patients on statin therapy also reported a significant increase in muscle cramp frequency and severity (pB0.0001). This study has demonstrated a strong association between statin medications and an increased rate of functional decline and muscle cramping in patients with ALS. Although this association does not prove a causal relationship, it is prudent to exercise caution and discuss discontinuation or replacement of statin medications in patients with ALS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".