MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947291597 · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002136

Reviewing the effects of thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics as photosensitizing drugs on the risk of skin cancer

2019· review· en· W2947291597 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hypertension · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSkin Protection and Aging
Canadian institutionsJewish General HospitalMcGill University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsThiazideMedicineHydrochlorothiazideInternal medicineObservational studyOncologyDiuretic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Thiazide diuretics and particularly hydrochlorothiazide were recently linked to an increased risk of skin cancer, which was attributed to the photosensitizing properties of these drugs. Given the widespread use of thiazide diuretics, a potential skin cancer promoting effect would impose an important public health concern. OBJECTIVE: To critically appraise in a narrative review, the association between use of thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics and risk of skin cancer. METHODS: We evaluated chemical structures and photosensitizing potential of selected thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics. Moreover, we searched PubMed up to December 2018 for observational studies assessing the association between use of thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics and risk of skin cancer. Study quality was assessed for major methodological biases. RESULTS: Commonly used thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics carry resonating structural components, such as sulfonamide groups that contribute to their photosensitizing activity. Overall, 13 observational (9 case-control, 4 cohort) studies assessed the association between use of different thiazide or thiazide-like diuretics and risk of several skin cancer types. Of those, nine studies showed positive associations ranging from 3% increased risk for bendroflumethiazide and basal cell carcinoma to 311% increased risk for thiazide diuretics and squamous cell carcinoma. All studies had important design-related methodological limitations including potential confounding by indication, detection bias, and time-window bias. CONCLUSION: Commonly used thiazide and thiazide-like diuretics have photosensitizing potential, and some observational studies with important methodological limitations have linked their use to an increased risk of skin cancer. Well designed observational studies are needed to provide more solid evidence on this possible association.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.267 · 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