Effect of statins type on incident prostate cancer risk: a meta-analysis and systematic review

The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of statins type or even when grouping statins by hydrophilic or hydrophobic nature on prostate cancer risk. A literature search was performed without language restrictions using the databases of PubMed (1984.1–2015.3), MEDLINE (1984.1–2015.3), and EMBASE (1990.1–2015.3). Two independent reviewers appraised eligible studies and extracted data. Weighted averages were reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Statistic heterogeneity scores were assessed with the standard Cochran's Q-test and I(2) statistic. Publication bias was detected using the Begg's and Egger's tests. All statistical analyses were conducted by STATA version 10. Finally, fourteen studies were included in the meta-analysis. Both hydrophilic and hydrophobic statins showed no association with incidence of prostate cancer (RR = 1.00, 95% CI: 0.82–1.17; RR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.73–1.08, respectively). Meanwhile, the risk of prostate cancer was not reduced in simvastatin (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.72–1.05), pravastatin (RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.94–1.11), atorvastatin (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.76–1.02), fluvastatin (RR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.97–1.01), or lovastatin users (RR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.79–1.08). The funnel plot showed that there was no publication bias. The results showed that statins had a neutral effect on prostate cancer risk; hydrophilic and hydrophobic statins as well as any subtype of statins did not affect the risk of prostate cancer.