MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

5-alpha reductase inhibitors and risk of male breast cancer.

2013· article· en· W2966235733 on OpenAlexaff
Mahyar Etminan, James M. Brophy, Abraham G. Hartzema, Joseph A. Delaney, Steven T. Bird

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMale Breast Health Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFinasterideDutasterideLumpectomy5 Alpha-Reductase InhibitorBreast cancerGynecomastiaCancerDiagnosis codeInternal medicineMastectomyRadiation therapyGynecologyDatabaseOncologyPopulationProstate cancerProstate

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e16013 Background: 5-alpha reductase inhibitors (5ARIs), finasteride and dutasteride, are one of the most popular classes of medications used by older men. The drugs are mainly used for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). There have been 50 cases of breast cancer potentially linked to both finasteride and dutasteride reported to the FDA. However, to date, no epidemiologic study has examined this potential link. Methods: We used the LifeLink database (IMS, USA) as the main source of data for this study. The database captures information on approximately 70 million US residents who are enrolled in a private healthcare plan. The database captures information on prescription drugs, hospitalizations, physician visits and demographics. Breast cancer cases were defined as those with a diagnosis (ICD-9-CM 175.X) on two days and either a procedural code (CPT-4) for a mastectomy or a lumpectomy/partial mastectomy with evidence of follow-up treatment (radiation/chemotherapy). The index date was deemed the first diagnostic or procedural code for breast cancer. This definition has been found to have a 93% positive predictive value for incident breast cancer. For each case, twenty controls were selected from the database using risk set sampling and matched on age within 5 years, date of diagnosis within six weeks and follow up time prior to the index date. We used logistic regression to compute adjusted rate ratios. The model was adjusted for the following covariates: age, calendar year, alcoholism, gynecomastia, Klinefelter’s disease, liver damage, obesity, oral estrogen, orchiectomy, and prior radiation. Results: There were 429 male breast cancer cases and matched them to 13,240 controls. 341 (79.5%) met our primary ascertainment, while 88 (20.5%) additional cases met our secondary criteria. We found no increased risk with male breast cancer and use of 1 year (RR=0.70, [95% CI0.34-1.45]) or 3 years of 5-ARIs therapy (RR=0.71, [95% CI:0.25-1.98]). Conclusions: We found no harmful association between sue of 5-ARIs and risk of male breast cancer. Future studies are needed to refute or confirm these findings.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.809

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.468
Teacher spread0.394 · 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicMale Breast Health StudiesFrench-language works237,207