Statin use and longitudinal changes in prostate volume; results from the REduction by DUtasteride of prostate Cancer Events ( <scp>REDUCE)</scp> trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test the association between statin use and prostate volume (PV) change over time using data from the REduction by DUtasteride of prostate Cancer Events (REDUCE) trial, a 4-year randomised controlled trial testing dutasteride for prostate cancer chemoprevention. SUBJECTS/PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified men with a baseline negative prostate biopsy from REDUCE who did not undergo prostate surgery or develop prostate cancer over the trial period. Men reported statin use at baseline. PV was determined from transrectal ultrasonography performed to guide prostate biopsy at baseline, and 2- and 4-years after randomisation. Multivariable generalised estimating equations tested differences in PV change over time by statin use, overall and stratified by treatment arm. We tested for interactions between statins and time in association with PV using the Wald test. RESULTS: Of 4106 men, 17% used statins at baseline. Baseline PV did not differ by statin use. Relative to non-users, statin users had decreasing PVs over the trial period (P = 0.027). Similar patterns were seen in the dutasteride and placebo arms, although neither reached statistical significance. The mean estimated PV was modestly but significantly lower in statin users relative to non-users in the dutasteride arm at 2-years (4.5%, P = 0.032) and 4-years (4.0%, P = 0.033), with similar (3-3.3%) but non-significant effects in the placebo arm. CONCLUSION: If confirmed, our present findings support a role for statins in modestly attenuating PV growth, with a magnitude of effect in line with previously reported prostate-specific antigen-lowering effects of statins (~4%). Future studies are needed to assess whether this putative role for statins in PV growth could impact lower urinary tract symptom development or progression.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".