A study[6] published in the journal Cancer pointed out that the overall survival rate of breast cancer patients taking statins could be relatively increased by 30%, while the BCSS rate could be relatively increased by 58%. This finding provides new insights into the treatment of breast cancer. There may be differences in the effects of different statins on improving the prognosis of patients with breast cancer. Hydrophobic statins (such as simvastatin, atorvastatin, etc.) have a statistically significant relationship with the improvement of patients' overall survival. And research on the recurrence rate of breast cancer, statin users displayed longer mean relapse-free survival (16.6 vs 10.2 years, P=0.028). After data had been adjusted for patient and disease characteristics, statin users maintained a lower risk of recurrence. [4,7,8]
In this meta-analysis the combined OR for statin use versus no use is 0.48 with a 95% CI of [0.27, 0.86]. This result indicates that statin use is associated with a statistically significant reduction in the recurrence risk (OR < 1) compared to no use, with a P-value of 0.01, suggesting that the overall effect is statistically significant. Heterogeneity Statistics: Chi² (Q) = 50.13, P < 0.00001, I²=96% ,The Chi-squared test for heterogeneity shows a highly significant P-value, confirming the presence of significant heterogeneity among the included studies. This statistic quantifies the proportion of total variation in study estimates due to heterogeneity rather than chance. And there is considerable variation in effect sizes across the three studies. Ahern TP[3] shows a much stronger effect than Borgquist S[5] and Sim Y[4] which could suggest differences in study populations, methods, or definitions of outcomes.
1 Discuss the sources of heterogeneity:
1.1 Study-Specific Odds Ratios and Confidence Intervals:
Ahern TP [3]: OR = 0.30 [0.26, 0.35], with a weight of 34.1%. This study shows a strong association between statin use and risk reduction, contributing significantly to the overall pooled effect. However, it also has the smallest confidence interval, indicating high precision, likely due to its large sample size. Borgquist S[5] : OR = 0.70 [0.57, 0.88], with a weight of 33.4%. This study shows a moderate effect size that is smaller than Ahern TP [3] but still statistically significant. Its result is less extreme than Ahern TP[3] and has a wider confidence interval. Sim Y 2022: OR = 0.55 [0.42, 0.72], with a weight of 32.5%. This study also shows a moderate effect size, with its confidence interval overlapping with that of Borgquist S[5] but not Ahern TP[3] . Despite the considerable variation in ORs, the conclusions drawn from the three studies are relatively consistent, indicating that the use of statins indeed reduces the recurrence rate in early-stage ER+ breast cancer patients.
1.2 Possible Sources of Heterogeneity:
1.2.1 The differences in the study populations are as follows:
Sim Y[4] focuses on breast cancer patients from the SingHealth Public Health Cluster in Singapore (2005-2015), including ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and stages I to III invasive cancer. Ahern TP[3] involves all female residents in Denmark diagnosed with stages I-III invasive breast cancer (1996-2003). Borgquist S[5] includes postmenopausal women with stages I-III invasive breast cancer from the BIG 1-98 trial (1988-2003). Since the recurrence risk for DCIS is lower than that for invasive breast cancer, this may result in a lower recurrence risk in the Sim Y[4] study compared to the other two studies. Additionally, Borgquist S[5] study population consists of postmenopausal early-stage breast cancer patients, which may lead to a lower recurrence risk compared to the other two studies that include patients of all ages. Sim Y[4] excluded patients who used statins before surgery, while the other two studies included breast cancer patients who used lipid-lowering drugs before diagnosis and after diagnosis. Patients using lipid-lowering drugs may be older than those who have not used such drugs, which could lead to a younger study population in Sim Y[4] with a higher baseline recurrence risk.
Sample Size Differences: Ahern TP[3] has a much larger total sample size compared to the other two studies, which could lead to its greater weight and influence on the pooled effect size. The larger sample size may provide more precise estimates, but it can also introduce variability if the study population is significantly different from the others.
And the age baseline of the populations included in the three studies is inconsistent, but due to insufficient detailed data, statistical analysis is not possible, and only descriptive analysis can be conducted: In Ahern TP[3], the age distribution of the statin use group is 50–59 years old (33.7%) and 60–69 years old (40.9%), while for the nonuser group, it is 50–59 years old (33.2%) and 60–69 years old (27.4%). In Borgquist S[5], the statin user group represents 6% of those under 65 years old and 11% of those 65 and older. In Sim Y[4], the statin user group is predominantly aged 50-59 (35.0%) and 60-69 (35.8%), while the nonusers group is mainly 40-49 years old (33.9%) and 50-59 years old (33.2%).
1.2.2 Differences in Research Methods
Ahern TP[3] utilizes a nationwide population-based prospective cohort study, registered through the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG), employing the Cox proportional hazards model to estimate the association between statin use and breast cancer recurrence. Borgquist S[5] conducts a retrospective study, employing marginal structural Cox proportional hazards models to address potential biases due to cholesterol levels, specified endocrine treatments, patient-specific risk factors, practice variations, and enrollment locations, comparing patient use of CLM and breast cancer outcomes under different treatment allocations. Sim Y[4] is a retrospective study focusing on patients who used statins post-diagnosis, adjusting for variables such as cardiac events and diabetes through statistical models to eliminate the impact of confounding factors on the results.
The three studies include populations of different ethnicities, and the confounding factors excluded to interfere with the trials are not consistent, which may contribute to heterogeneity among the studies. Ahern TP[3], being a prospective cohort study, can better establish causal relationships compared to the other two retrospective cohort studies, reducing selection and recall biases and providing better control over the data collection process, thus making the results more persuasive.
1.3 Specific Differences in Outcome Evaluation
Ahern TP [3] conducted subgroup analyses that established a correlation between the use of lipophilic statins, such as simvastatin, and a reduced risk of breast cancer recurrence, while hydrophilic statins showed no significant association. Borgquist S[5] observed significant improvements in disease-free survival (DFS), breast cancer-free interval (BCFI), and distant recurrence-free interval (DRFI) for patients using lipid-lowering drugs at the initiation of endocrine therapy; however, these benefits were primarily limited to those undergoing letrozole treatment, with no subgroup analysis conducted on the types of lipid-lowering drugs. Sim Y[4] did not perform subgroup analyses regarding drug types or endocrine therapy. Affects the following:
1.3.1 Increased heterogeneity: The studies by Ahern TP[3] and Borgquist S[5] performed different levels of subgroup analyses on the use of lipid-lowering drugs and lipophilic statins, while Sim Y[4] did not perform subgroup analyses based on drug types or endocrine therapy. This inconsistency in analysis methods may lead to increased heterogeneity in the meta-analysis, meaning greater variability between study results, which could affect the overall effect estimate.
1.3.2 Influence of confounding factors: Studies that do not perform subgroup analyses based on drug types or endocrine therapy (such as Sim Y) may overlook potential confounding factors. For example, different types of statins (lipophilic vs. hydrophilic) or different endocrine therapies (e.g., letrozole vs. other drugs) may have varying impacts on the risk of breast cancer recurrence. Failing to distinguish these differences may lead to biased effect estimates.
By considering these factors, the findings suggest that while there is evidence of a beneficial effect of statin use, the differences between studies are substantial and should be explored further to understand the true magnitude and applicability of the observed effects.
2 Mechanisms by Which Statins Improve Prognosis in Breast Cancer
ER+ breast cancer patients taking endocrine therapy may experience elevated blood lipid levels due to the reduction of estrogen levels. Statins, which lower blood lipid levels, could potentially improve the postoperative incidence of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases in ER+ patients. On the other hand, statins primarily reduce cholesterol levels by inhibiting HMG-CoA reductase.[9,10,11] This action helps to diminish the lipid-rich environment required by breast cancer cells, thereby inhibiting tumor growth and spread. The specific mechanisms include:
2.1 Inhibition of Tumor Cell Proliferation and Migration
Statins are capable of inhibiting the proliferation and migration of breast cancer cells, reducing the invasiveness of these cells[12,13,14]. This may be related to statins' ability to regulate the cell cycle, induce apoptosis, and inhibit tumor angiogenesis.
2.2 Enhancement of the Immune System's Anti-Tumor Effects
Statins may also improve the prognosis of breast cancer patients by enhancing the immune system's anti-tumor effects.[15] For example, statins can promote the maturation and activation of dendritic cells, enhancing the body's ability to recognize and eliminate tumor cells.[16,17,18]
3 Limitations of This Study:
3.1The meta-analysis data were not sufficiently detailed to conduct a thorough subgroup analysis based on endocrine therapy medications or lipid-lowering drugs. Additionally, it did not allow for classification based on tumor size, presence of axillary lymph node metastasis, or other immunohistochemical results (such as Her-2 expression). Some laboratory and epidemiological studies have suggested that statins, a class of drugs commonly used to lower cholesterol levels, may have a positive impact on patients with triple-negative breast cancer.[19,20] Due to the lack of consistent subgroup analysis, the conclusions of the meta-analysis may be limited and unable to clarify the specific relationships between certain drug types or therapy types and disease prognosis. This could result in more generalized findings, making it difficult to provide specific and targeted recommendations for clinical decision-making.
3.2 Study Design and Generalizability: The study relied on retrospective data, which is more susceptible to biases such as selection bias and recall bias compared to prospective studies. And due to the limited number of studies and the specific patient populations they represent, the findings may not be generalizable to all ER+ breast cancer patients.
3.3 Lack of Long-Term Data: The study did not include long-term follow-up data, which is essential for understanding the long-term effects of statin use on recurrence rates and overall survival.
3.4 Dosage and Duration: Information regarding the dosage and duration of statin use was not detailed, which are important factors that could influence the effects of statins on breast cancer outcomes.[19,22]
4 Future Perspectives and Research Directions:
4.1 Large-Scale Prospective Studies: Conducting large-scale, multicenter, prospective cohort studies to confirm the effects of statins on breast cancer recurrence rates, especially among ER+ patients. These studies should aim to collect more detailed data on statin usage, including type, dosage, and duration.
4.2 Subgroup Analysis: Future studies should aim to perform subgroup analyses based on various factors such as the type of endocrine therapy, specific statin medications, tumor characteristics (size, grade, and molecular subtypes), and patient demographics to better understand the nuances of statin effects.
4.3 Mechanistic Studies: Further laboratory and clinical research is needed to elucidate the mechanisms by which statins may influence breast cancer outcomes. This includes exploring the impact of statins on tumor cell proliferation, migration, angiogenesis, and immune response.
4.4 Genetic and Pharmacogenomic Studies: Investigating genetic factors that may influence individual responses to statin therapy could identify patients who are more likely to benefit from statin treatment.
4.5 Randomized Controlled Trials: While observational studies provide preliminary evidence, randomized controlled trials are needed to establish a causal relationship between statin use and breast cancer outcomes.
4.6 Combination Therapy: Exploring the potential synergistic effects of statins in combination with other breast cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, or targeted therapies.
4.7Disease Surveillance: Developing and validating predictive models that incorporate statin use along with other clinical variables to improve risk stratification and personalized treatment strategies for breast cancer patients.
In summary, statins have demonstrated significant potential in improving the prognosis of breast cancer patients. However, current research has some limitations, such as insufficient sample sizes and short follow-up durations. Therefore, future studies require large-scale, long-term clinical trials to further validate the efficacy and safety of statins in the treatment of early-stage ER+ breast cancer. Additionally, it is essential to delve into the specific mechanisms by which statins improve the prognosis of breast cancer, providing a scientific basis for personalized treatment of the disease.