MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587347639 · doi:10.2147/clep.s124674

Risk of gynecomastia and breast cancer associated with the use of 5-alpha reductase inhibitors for benign prostatic hyperplasia

2017· article· en· W2587347639 on OpenAlexaff
Katrina Wilcox Hagberg, Hozefa A. Divan, Shona Fang, J. Curtis Nickel, Susan S. Jick

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Epidemiology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMale Breast Health Studies
Canadian institutionsKingston General HospitalQueen's University
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineGynecomastiaBreast cancerOdds ratioCohortInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)UrologyGynecologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Clinical trial results suggest that 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5ARIs) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) may increase the risk of gynecomastia and male breast cancer, but epidemiological studies have been limited. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a cohort study with nested case-control analyses using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We identified men diagnosed with BPH who were free from Klinefelter syndrome, prostate, genital or urinary cancer, prostatectomy or orchiectomy, or evidence of gynecomastia or breast cancer. Patients entered the cohort at age ≥40 years and at least 3 years after the start of their electronic medical record. We classified exposure as 5ARIs (alone or in combination with alpha blockers [ABs]), AB only, or unexposed to 5ARIs and ABs. Cases were men who had a first-time diagnosis of gynecomastia or breast cancer. Incidence rates and incidence rate ratios (IRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in the gynecomastia analysis and crude and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs in both analyses were calculated. RESULTS: Compared to no exposure, gynecomastia risk was elevated for users of 5ARIs (alone or in combination with ABs) in both the cohort (IRR=3.55, 95% CI 3.05-4.14) and case-control analyses (OR=3.31, 95% CI 2.66-4.10), whereas the risk was null for users of AB only. The increased risk of gynecomastia with the use of 5ARIs persisted regardless of the number of prescriptions, exposure timing, and presence or absence of concomitant prescriptions for drugs known to be associated with gynecomastia. The risk was higher for dutasteride than for finasteride. 5ARI users did not have an increased risk of breast cancer compared to unexposed men (OR=1.52, 95% CI 0.61-3.80). CONCLUSION: In men with BPH, 5ARIs significantly increased the risk of gynecomastia, but not breast cancer, compared to AB use and no exposure.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.466
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical EpidemiologySame topicMale Breast Health StudiesFrench-language works237,207