ReviewCureus2025
Updated Evidence on the Protective Role of Statins in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review of Clinical and Mechanistic Insights.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality, highlighting the need for effective chemopreventive measures. Statins, commonly prescribed for cardiovascular disease, have demonstrated potential anti-cancer effects; however, epidemiological evidence remains inconsistent. This systematic review evaluates the relationship between statin usage and CRC risk, focusing on clinical outcomes. Following PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a thorough search through PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Embase for relevant studies. Sixteen studies met our inclusion criteria, encompassing clinical and epidemiological research. Using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool, we synthesized the data and assessed bias risk. Most studies (11/16) indicated a protective effect of statins, with risk reductions between 12% to 24% (e.g., 95% adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of 0.87; CI: 0.83 to 0.91). However, conflicting findings were noted, including an increased risk of proximal CRC with long-term statin use (HR: 2.17) and neutral effects on metastatic CRC. Overall, statins show moderate chemopreventive effects against CRC, particularly in specific molecular subtypes. Discrepancies in outcomes may be attributed to differences in statin type, duration, and tumor biology. Future research should focus on biomarker-stratified randomized trials to refine statin-based prevention strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.