MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4289856294 · doi:10.1186/s12916-022-02442-w

Medication use and risk of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis—a systematic review

2022· review· en· W4289856294 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Can Cui, Jiangwei Sun, Kyla A. McKay, Caroline Ingre, Fang Fang

Bibliographic record

VenueBMC Medicine · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilVetenskapsrådetKarolinska InstitutetCenters for Disease Control and PreventionEU Joint Programme – Neurodegenerative Disease Research
KeywordsMedicineMEDLINEObservational studySystematic reviewIntensive care medicineClinical study designClinical trialInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Studying whether medications act as potential risk factors for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) can contribute to the understanding of disease etiology as well as the identification of novel therapeutic targets. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review to summarize the existing evidence on the association between medication use and the subsequent ALS risk. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in Medline, Embase, and Web of Science from the date of database establishment to December 10, 2021. References of identified articles were further searched for additional relevant articles. Studies were included if (1) published in English, (2) explored medication use as exposure and development of ALS as outcome, and (3) the design was a human observational study. Clinical trials, reviews, comments, editorials, and case reports were excluded. Quality assessment was performed using a pre-validated tool for non-randomized studies, the Newcastle-Ottawa Assessment Scale (NOS). RESULTS: Of the 4760 studies identified, 25 articles, including 13 case-control studies, five nested case-control studies, six cohort studies, and one retrospective chart review, were included in the review. Among these studies, there were 22 distinct study populations that included 171,407 patients with ALS, seven classes of medication examined, and 23 studies with a NOS ≥ 5. There was a general lack of agreement between studies on the associations of cholesterol-lowering drugs, anti-inflammatory drugs, immunosuppressants, antibiotics, oral contraceptives (OCs) or hormone replacement therapy (HRT), antihypertensive drugs, antidiabetics, and drugs for psychiatric and neurological disorders with the subsequent risk of ALS. However, it appeared that statins, aspirin, OCs/HRT, antihypertensives, and antidiabetics were unlikely related to a higher risk of ALS. The positive associations noted for antibiotics, antidepressants, and skeletal muscle relaxants might be attributable to prodromal symptoms of ALS. CONCLUSIONS: There is currently no strong evidence to link any medication use with ALS risk.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.204
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.173 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBMC MedicineSame topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ResearchFrench-language works237,207