MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011082741 · doi:10.3390/cancers12030671

Statin Use and the Risk of Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

2020· review· en· W3011082741 on OpenAlex
Md. Mohaimenul Islam, Tahmina Nasrin Poly, Bruno Walther, Hsuan‐Chia Yang, Yu‐Chuan Li

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Education, India
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineHepatocellular carcinomaMeta-analysisConfidence intervalRelative riskObservational studyStatinCirrhosisPublication biasOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and Aims: Statins are the first-line medication to treating hypercholesterolemia. Several studies have investigated the impact of statins on the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the extent to which statins may prevent HCC remains uncertain. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis of relevant studies to quantify the magnitude of the association between statins use and the risk of HCC. Methods: A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus was performed for studies published between January 1, 1990, and September 1, 2019, with no restriction of language. Two reviewers independently evaluated the literature and included observational and experimental studies that reported the association between statin use and HCC risk. The random-effect model was used to calculate the overall risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI), and the heterogeneity among the studies was assessed using the Q statistic and I2 statistic. The Newcastle Ottawa Scale (NOS) was also used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. Results: A total of 24 studies with 59,073 HCC patients was identified. Statin use was associated with a reduced risk of HCC development (RR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.47–0.61, I2 = 84.39%) compared with nonusers. Moreover, the rate of HCC reduction was also significant among patients with diabetes (RR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.28–0.70), liver cirrhosis (RR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.30–0.42), and antiviral therapy (RR: 0.21, 95% CI: 0.08–0.59) compared with nonusers. Conclusion: This study serves as additional evidence supporting the beneficial inhibitory effect of statins on HCC incidence. The subgroup analyses of this study also highlight that statins are significantly associated with a reduced risk of HCC and may help to direct future prevention efforts. Additional large clinical studies are needed to determine whether statins are associated with a lower risk of HCC.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.621

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.194
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.156 · 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