MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Risk of Death Due to Breast Cancer in Women Treated with Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Antidepressants and Tamoxifen.

2009· article· en· W2314474958 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cornelius Kelly, Catherine M. Kelly, David N. Juurlink, Tara Gomes, Minh Duong-Hua, K.I. Pritchard, K. I. Pritchard, K. Pritchard, Peter C. Austin, Lawrence Paszat

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEstrogen and related hormone effects
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTamoxifenBreast cancerMedicineParoxetineFluoxetineInternal medicineSertralineVenlafaxineAntidepressantOncologyPopulationCitalopramCYP2D6CancerSerotonin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Tamoxifen is widely prescribed to women with breast cancer, but is a prodrug converted by cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP 2D6) to its active metabolite endoxifen. Selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor antidepressants (SSRIs) are commonly co-prescribed with tamoxifen, but inhibit CYP 2D6 to varying degrees and may decrease the effectiveness of tamoxifen.Materials and methods: We conducted a population-based retrospective cohort study of women in Ontario, Canada aged 66 years of age or older who were treated with tamoxifen for breast cancer between 1993 and 2005 and had overlapping SSRI therapy. Following completion of tamoxifen therapy, we modeled the risk of death from breast cancer as a function of the proportion of time on tamoxifen during which each SSRI had been co-prescribed.Results: We identified 24,430 women aged 66 years and older who started tamoxifen therapy during the 13 year study period. Of these, 7489 (30.6%) received at least one antidepressant during tamoxifen therapy. After excluding those treated with no SSRI or with multiple SSRIs, those with poor adherence to tamoxifen therapy, and those with unknown cause of death, the primary analysis included 2430 women. Paroxetine was the most commonly prescribed SSRI (n=630; 25.9%) followed by sertraline (n=541; 22.3%), citalopram (n=467; 19.2%), venlafaxine (n=365; 15.0%) fluoxetine (n=253; 10.4%) and fluvoxamine (n=174; 7.2%). A total of 1074 (44.2%) women died during follow-up and there were 374 (34.8%) breast cancer deaths. After adjustment for age, duration of tamoxifen therapy, and other potential confounders absolute increases of 25%, 50%, and 75% in the percentage of time co-prescribed paroxetine during tamoxifen therapy were associated with 24%, 54% and 91% increases in the risk of death from breast cancer respectively (p<0.05 for each comparison). In contrast, we found no such risk with fluoxetine, sertraline, fluvoxamine or citalopram. We observed a nonsignificant trend toward reduced breast cancer mortality among venlafaxine users, which may reflect the common practice of using venlafaxine for tamoxifen-related hot flashes, a putative predictor of better outcomes in women receiving tamoxifen. We replicated our analyses using death from any cause as the outcome of interest (n=1074). After adjusting for potential confounders, we found that absolute increases of 25%, 50% and 75% in paroxetine exposure during tamoxifen therapy were associated with relative increases of 13%, 28% and 46%, respectively, in the risk of death from any cause. In contrast, we found no such increased risk in all-cause mortality associated with exposure to the other SSRIs in women receiving tamoxifen for breast cancer.Discussion: Paroxetine use during tamoxifen therapy is associated with an increased risk of death due to breast cancer. This supports the hypothesis that paroxetine-mediated CYP 2D6 inhibition can reduce or abolish the beneficial effects of tamoxifen. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 2049.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicEstrogen and related hormone effects→French-language works237,207→