MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391692118 · doi:10.1093/eurjpc/zwae057

Recommended and observed statin use among US adults with and without cancer

2024· article· en· W4391692118 on OpenAlexaff
Ofer Kobo, Erin D. Michos, Ariel Roguin, Rodrigo Bagur, Martha Gulati, Mamas A. Mamas

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Preventive Cardiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineStatinCancerSocioeconomic statusNational Health and Nutrition Examination SurveyEthnic groupInternal medicineFamily historyCancer preventionPhysical therapyDemographyEnvironmental healthPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Patients with cancer are at increased cardiovascular (CV) risk. We aimed to compare the recommended and observed statin use among individuals with and without cancer. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using three 2-year cycles from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2013-18), we analysed data from 17 050 US adults. We compared the prevalence of Class 1 statin recommendations and use between individuals with and without cancer, overall, and among different demographic groups. Individuals with a history of cancer were older and had a higher burden of comorbidities. Stratified by age groups, they were more likely to have a secondary prevention indication compared with individuals without cancer but not a primary prevention indication for statin. Among individuals with an indication for statin therapy, the prevalence of statin use was higher in the cancer group compared with those without cancer (60.8% vs. 47.8%, P < 0.001), regardless of sex, type of indication (primary vs. secondary prevention), and education level. However, the higher prevalence of statin use in the cancer group was noted among younger individuals, ethnic minorities, and those with lower family income. CONCLUSION: Our finding highlights the importance of optimization of CV health in patients with cancer, as individuals with cancer were more likely to have a Class 1 indication for statin treatment when compared with individuals without cancer. Important differences in statin use among cohorts based on sex, age, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status were identified, which may provide a framework through which CV risk factor control can be targeted in this population. KEY FINDINGS: Higher statin use in cancer patients: Among those with Class 1 recommendation to take statins, 60.8% of cancer patients were using them, compared with 47.8% of non-cancer individuals, indicating a greater adherence to heart health recommendations in the cancer group. Demographic variations in statin use: The study found notable differences in statin use among younger individuals, ethnic minorities, and those with lower income within the cancer patient group, suggesting disparities in how these subgroups manage their cardiovascular health.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Preventive CardiologySame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207