MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4225820050 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2022.865988

Metformin Use on Incidence and Oncologic Outcomes of Bladder Cancer Patients With T2DM: An Updated Meta-Analysis

2022· review· en· W4225820050 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chen‐Qian Liu, Jian‐Xuan Sun, Jin‐Zhou Xu, Xiaoyuan Qian, Senyuan Hong, Mengyao Xu, Ye An, Qi‐Dong Xia, Jia Hu, Shaogang Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMetforminBladder cancerHazard ratioInternal medicineCochrane LibraryIncidence (geometry)Meta-analysisOncologyCancerOdds ratioConfidence intervalInsulin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The incidence rate and mortality of bladder cancer are increasing year by year. Interestingly, the commonly used metabolic regulatory drug metformin has been reported to have anti-tumor effect in recent years. Nevertheless, it keeps unclear whether the usage of metformin is beneficial or unbeneficial in treating bladder cancer. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to explore the long-term effect of metformin on the incidence of bladder cancer and OS, PFS, DSS and RFS in bladder cancer patients with T2DM. Method: We aim to collect evidence of the association between the usage of metformin and the incidence and treatment outcome of bladder cancer. We searched PubMed, Embase, Ovid Medline and Cochrane Library up to February 2021 to get effective literature reporting the effects of metformin in bladder cancer. The main outcomes were the protective effects of metformin on the incidence, overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and disease-specific survival (DSS) of bladder cancer. And OR (odds ratio) and HR (hazard ratio) with their 95%CI were pooled. Two independent researchers assessed the quality of included studies using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Results: We involved 12 studies meeting the inclusion criteria, including a total of 1,552,773 patients. The meta-analysis showed that use of metformin could decrease the incidence (OR = 0.45, 95%CI = 0.37–0.56; p < 0.01) and prolong recurrence-free-survival (HR = 0.56, 95%CI = 0.41–0.76; p = 0.91) of bladder cancer. However, there were no significant protective effects in the overall survival (HR = 0.93, 95%CI = 0.67–1.28, p = 0.05), disease-specific-survival (HR = 0.73, 95%CI = 0.47–1.16; p = 0.01), and progression-free-survival (HR = 0.78, 95%CI = 0.53–1.15, p = 0.34). Conclusion: The results revealed that the usage of metformin could reduce the incidence of bladder cancer and prolong the prognosis of bladder cancer in T2DM patients, respectively. More prospective studies are needed to prove the protective role of metformin on bladder cancer.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.021
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.021
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.053
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations19
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and CancerFrench-language works237,207