A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis on the Role of Statins in the Prevention of Mortality Following Pancreatic Cancer

Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a type of cancer with a high incidence and case-fatality rate. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the role of statins in preventing mortality following PC based on scientific evidence with systematic review and meta-analysis method. Methods: This meta-analysis considered studies published from 1980 till the end of 2022 in ISI Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed, Cochrane, Science Direct, Google Scholar, and Embase databases. Funnel diagrams and Begg's and Egger's tests were used to assess the publication bias. Results: In general, this meta-analysis has included 19 studies (13 cohort studies, 4 case-control, and 2 randomized clinical trials (RCTs)) and a total of 100,888 patients with PC. The risk of mortality of PC in statin users in total was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.80 - 0.92, P-value <0.001); in the case-control studies, it was equal to 0.53 (0.34-0.83); in the cohort studies, it was equal to 0.87 (0.82-0.92, P-value <0.001); in RCTs, it was equal to 1.19 (0.99-1.42, P-value <0.001); in studies with good quality score category, it was equal to 0.92 (0.86-0.99, P-value <0.001), and in articles of the moderate quality score category, it was equal to 0.73 (0.64-0.84, P-value <0.001). The results of statistical tests indicated the existence of publication bias (Begg's test (P-value = 0.002) and Egger's test (P-value = 0.004)). Conclusion: Statins reduce the risk of mortality in patients with PC. However, no significant relation has been observed in RCTs. Therefore, it is necessary to be cautious in interpreting the results.

Automated summary

This study provides scientific evidence through systematic review and meta-analysis that statins can reduce the risk of mortality in patients with pancreatic cancer, especially in case-control studies and studies with good quality scores. However, no significant relation was observed in randomized clinical trials, highlighting the need for cautious interpretation of the results.