MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2554614845 · doi:10.1038/bjc.2016.375

The use of drugs acting on the renin–angiotensin system and the incidence of pancreatic cancer

2016· article· en· W2554614845 on OpenAlexafffund
Victoria Mandilaras, Nathaniel Bouganim, Hui Yin, Jamil Asselah, Laurent Azoulay

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenin-Angiotensin System Studies
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsRenin–angiotensin systemPancreatic cancerIncidence (geometry)MedicineCancerInternal medicineEndocrinologyPharmacologyBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly used antihypertensives. Recently, these drugs have been associated with a protective effect against pancreatic cancer, but data on this putative association remain limited. Thus, the objective of this study was to determine whether the use of ACEIs and/or ARBs is associated with a decreased risk of pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study, using a nested case-control analysis within the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink population. The cohort consisted of all patients newly treated with antihypertensive drugs between 1 January 1995 and 31 December 2009, with follow-up until 31 December 2010. Cases were patients with newly diagnosed pancreatic cancer, which were matched with up to 10 controls on age, sex, calendar year of cohort entry, and duration of follow-up. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of pancreatic cancer incidence associated with ever use of ACEIs and ARBs. A secondary analysis was conducted to assess whether the incidence of pancreatic cancer varied with cumulative duration of use of these drugs. RESULTS: A cohort of 547 566 was assembled. During 3 040 332 person-years of follow-up, a total of 866 patients were newly diagnosed with pancreatic cancer (rate: 3/10 000 per year) and matched to 8636 controls. Overall, when compared with other antihypertensive drugs, the use of ACEIs was not associated with a decreased risk of pancreatic cancer overall (OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.86-1.17) or according to cumulative duration of use. The use of ARBs was not associated with a decreased risk of pancreatic cancer overall (OR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.75-1.15), whereas a cumulative duration of use of 1-3 years was associated with a 38% decrease (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.41-0.94), which returned to the null after >3 years of use (OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.74-1.46). CONCLUSIONS: The use of ARBs and ACEIs was not associated with an overall decreased risk of pancreatic cancer when compared with patients using other antihypertensive drugs. Additional research is needed to determine whether ARBs may confer a short-term protective effect.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score0.572

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations30
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicRenin-Angiotensin System StudiesFrench-language works237,207