ReviewCancer research communications2022
Identification of Drug-Cancer Associations: A Nationwide Screening Study.
Review in Cancer research communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Drug use and acute kidney injury: a Drug-Wide Association Study (DWAS) in Denmark and Sweden.Clinical kidney journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The main tool in drug safety monitoring, spontaneous reporting of adverse effects, is unlikely to detect delayed adverse drug effects including cancer. Hypothesis-free screening studies based on administrative data could improve ongoing drug safety monitoring. Using Danish health registries, we conducted a series of case-control studies by identifying individuals with incident cancer in Denmark from 2001 to 2018, matching each case with 10 population controls on age, sex, and calendar time. ORs were estimated using conditional logistic regression accounting for matching factors, educational level, and selected comorbidities. A total of 13,577 drug-cancer associations were examined for individual drugs and 8,996 for drug classes. We reviewed 274 drug-cancer pairs where an association with high use and a cumulative dose-response pattern was present. We classified 65 associations as not readily attributable to bias of which 20 were established as carcinogens by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the remaining 45 associations may warrant further study. The screening program identified drugs with known carcinogenic effects and highlighted a number of drugs that were not established as carcinogens and warrant further study. The effect estimates in this study should be interpreted cautiously and will need confirmation targeted epidemiologic and translational studies. Significance: This study provides a screening tool for drug carcinogenicity aimed at hypothesis generation and explorative purposes. As such, the study may help to identify drugs with unknown carcinogenic effects and, ultimately, improve drug safety as part of the ongoing safety monitoring of drugs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.