Metformin use and prostate cancer risk: A meta-analysis of cohort studies

Effect of Metformin Versus Placebo on New Primary Cancers in Canadian Cancer Trials Group MA.32: A Secondary Analysis of a Phase III Randomized Double-Blind Trial in Early Breast Cancer

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned coprimary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Metformin has been associated with lower cancer risk in epidemiologic and preclinical research. In the MA.32 randomized adjuvant breast cancer trial, metformin (v placebo) did not affect invasive disease-free or overall survival. Here, we report metformin effects on the risk of new cancer. Between 2010 and 2013, 3,649 patients with breast cancer younger than 75 years without diabetes with high-risk T1-3, N0-3 M0 breast cancer (any estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) were randomly assigned to metformin 850 mg orally twice a day or placebo twice a day for 5 years. New primary invasive cancers (outside the ipsilateral breast) developing as a first event were identified. Time to events was described by the competing risks method; two-sided likelihood ratio tests adjusting for age, BMI, smoking, and alcohol intake were used to compare metformin versus placebo arms. A total of 184 patients developed new invasive cancers: 102 metformin and 82 placebo, hazard ratio (HR), 1.25; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.68; P = .13. These included 48 contralateral invasive breast cancers (27 metformin v 21 placebo), HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.72 to 2.27; P = .40 and 136 new nonbreast primary cancers (75 metformin v 61 placebo), HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.74; P = .21. Metformin did not reduce the risk of new cancer development in these nondiabetic patients with breast cancer.

2022 Update on Prostate Cancer Epidemiology and Risk Factors-A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. Understanding the epidemiology and risk factors of the disease is paramount to improve primary and secondary prevention strategies.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review and summarize the current evidence on the descriptive epidemiology, large screening studies, diagnostic techniques, and risk factors of PCa.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

PCa incidence and mortality rates for 2020 were obtained from the GLOBOCAN database of the International Agency for Research on Cancer. A systematic search was performed in July 2022 using PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE biomedical databases. The review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022359728).

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Globally, PCa is the second most common cancer, with the highest incidence in North and South America, Europe, Australia, and the Caribbean. Risk factors include age, family history, and genetic predisposition. Additional factors may include smoking, diet, physical activity, specific medications, and occupational factors. As PCa screening has become more accepted, newer approaches such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and biomarkers have been implemented to identify patients who are likely to harbor significant tumors. Limitations of this review include the evidence being derived from meta-analyses of mostly retrospective studies.

CONCLUSIONS

PCa remains the second most common cancer among men worldwide. PCa screening is gaining acceptance and will likely reduce PCa mortality at the cost of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Increasing use of MRI and biomarkers for the detection of PCa may mitigate some of the negative consequences of screening.

PATIENT SUMMARY

Prostate cancer (PCa) remains the second most common cancer among men, and screening for PCa is likely to increase in the future. Improved diagnostic techniques can help reduce the number of men who need to be diagnosed and treated to save one life. Avoidable risk factors for PCa may include factors such as smoking, diet, physical activity, specific medications, and certain occupations.

The Relationship between Metformin Consumption and Cancer Risk: An Updated Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Background

Considering that metformin is widely used in the treatment of diabetes, and its protective role against various malignancies, the strength and validity of the available evidence from related systematic reviews and meta-analysis were evaluated.

Methods

Scopus, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Web of science databases, and Google Scholar and manual screening of retrieved references were systematically searched from their inception dates to 24 March 2020 by extracting the effect size (Odds ratios (OR) and relative risk (RR) in each study. To present the forest plot of effect of metformin on each cancer, Stata version 14.2 was used.

Results

This study included 36 meta-analysis studies and 620 original research studies (26 randomized control trials studies and 594 observational studies (cohort, case-control)) covering 15 different cancers. Overall, metformin medication prevented different cancers, including ovarian cancer (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.62,0.93), cervical cancer (OR = 0.60, 95% CI: 0.43, 0.83), endometrial cancer (OR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.82,1.35), liver cancer (OR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.47,0.74), pancreatic cancer (OR = 0.59, 95%CI 0.50,0.69), head and neck cancer (OR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.61,0.83), stomach cancer (OR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.26,1.99), colorectal cancer (OR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.59,0.91), colorectal adenoma cancer (OR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.65,0.86), colon cancer (OR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.69,0.91), esophagus cancer (OR = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.83,0.98), lung cancer (OR = 0.92, CI95%:0.85,0.99), breast cancer (OR = 0.93, 95% CI: 0.84,1.02), prostate cancer (OR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.85-1.04), and bladder cancer (OR = 0.94 95% CI: 0.64,1.38).

Conclusions

Treatment with metformin can significantly decrease the chance of all cancers with larger preventive effect on hepatocellular carcinoma and smaller preventive effect on lung and breast cancers.

Diabetes, metabolic syndrome and prostate cancer risk: Results from the EPICAP case-control study

BACKGROUND

Diabetes may be associated with decreased prostate cancer (PCa) risk. However, previous studies have not always accounted for time since diabetes diagnosis or antidiabetic drug use. Futhermore, the role of metabolic syndrome (MetS) in PCa risk is still debated. We investigated the role of diabetes and MetS in PCa risk based on data from the Epidemiological study of PCa (EPICAP).

METHODS

EPICAP is a population-based case-control study that included 819 incident PCa cases in 2012-2013 and 879 controls frequency matched by age. MetS was characterized according to National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP III). Logistic regression models adjusted for age, family history of PCa and ethnicity, were used to assess odds ratios (ORs) and their 95%conficence intervals (CIs) for the associations between diabetes, MetS and PCa risk.

RESULTS

Whereas we did not observed an association between diabetes and PCa, a decreased risk of PCa has been highlighted with an increasing treated diabetes duration (p-trend=0.008). No association has been observed between MetS, the number of MetS criteria and the risk of PCa. However, we suggested that NSAIDs use could modify the association between MetS and PCa risk.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest an inverse association between the duration of diabetes and PCa risk. The role of metabolic factors, such as MetS and its components, in PCa risk remains unclear and requires further investigations.

Acquired drug resistance interferes with the susceptibility of prostate cancer cells to metabolic stress

Background

Metformin is an inhibitor of oxidative phosphorylation that displays an array of anticancer activities. The interference of metformin with the activity of multi-drug resistance systems in cancer cells has been reported. However, the consequences of the acquired chemoresistance for the adaptative responses of cancer cells to metformin-induced stress and for their phenotypic evolution remain unaddressed.

Methods

Using a range of phenotypic and metabolic assays, we assessed the sensitivity of human prostate cancer PC-3 and DU145 cells, and their drug-resistant lineages (PC-3_DCX20 and DU145_DCX20), to combined docetaxel/metformin stress. Their adaptation responses have been assessed, in particular the shifts in their metabolic profile and invasiveness.

Results

Metformin increased the sensitivity of PC-3 wild-type (WT) cells to docetaxel, as illustrated by the attenuation of their motility, proliferation, and viability after the combined drug application. These effects correlated with the accumulation of energy carriers (NAD(P)H and ATP) and with the inactivation of ABC drug transporters in docetaxel/metformin-treated PC-3 WT cells. Both PC-3 WT and PC-3_DCX20 reacted to metformin with the Warburg effect; however, PC-3_DCX20 cells were considerably less susceptible to the cytostatic/misbalancing effects of metformin. Concomitantly, an epithelial–mesenchymal transition and Cx43 upregulation was seen in these cells, but not in other more docetaxel/metformin-sensitive DU145_DCX20 populations. Stronger cytostatic effects of the combined fenofibrate/docetaxel treatment confirmed that the fine-tuning of the balance between energy supply and expenditure determines cellular welfare under metabolic stress.

Conclusions

Collectively, our data identify the mechanisms that underlie the limited potential of metformin for the chemotherapy of drug-resistant tumors. Metformin can enhance the sensitivity of cancer cells to chemotherapy by inducing their metabolic decoupling/imbalance. However, the acquired chemoresistance of cancer cells impairs this effect, facilitates cellular adaptation to metabolic stress, and prompts the invasive front formation.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s11658-022-00400-1.

Systematic review of antitumour efficacy and mechanism of metformin activity in prostate cancer models

Metformin, the first line pharmacotherapy for type 2 diabetes has demonstrated favourable effects in prostate cancer (PCa) across a range of studies evaluating PCa patient outcomes amongst metformin users. However, a lack of rigorously conducted prospective studies has stalled clinical use in this setting. Despite multiple studies evaluating the mechanisms underpinning antitumour effects of metformin in PCa, to date, no reviews have compared these findings. This systematic review and meta-analysis consolidates the mechanisms accounting for the antitumour effect of metformin in PCa and evaluates the antitumour efficacy of metformin in preclinical PCa studies. Data were obtained through Medline and EMBASE, extracted by two independent assessors. Risk of bias was assessed using the TOXR tool. Meta-analysis compared in vivo reductions of PCa tumour volume with metformin. In total, 447 articles were identified with 80 duplicates, and 261 articles excluded based on eligibility criteria. The remaining 106 articles were assessed and 71 excluded, with 35 articles included for systematic review, and eight included for meta-analysis. The mechanisms of action of metformin regarding tumour growth, viability, migration, invasion, cell metabolism, and activation of signalling cascades are individually discussed. The mechanisms by which metformin inhibits PCa cell growth are multimodal. Metformin regulates expression of multiple proteins/genes to inhibit cellular proliferation, cell cycle progression, and cellular invasion and migration. Published in vivo studies also conclusively demonstrate that metformin inhibits PCa growth. This highlights the potential of metformin to be repurposed as an anticancer agent, warranting further investigation of metformin in the setting of PCa.

Family history, obesity, urological factors and diabetic medications and their associations with risk of prostate cancer diagnosis in a large prospective study

Background

Prostate cancer (PC) aetiology is unclear. PC risk was examined in relation to several factors in a large population-based prospective study.

Methods

Male participants were from Sax Institute’s 45 and Up Study (Australia) recruited between 2006 and 2009. Questionnaire and linked administrative health data from the Centre for Health Record Linkage and Services Australia were used to identify incident PC, healthcare utilisations, Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) testing reimbursements and dispensing of metformin and benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) prescriptions. Multivariable Cox and Joint Cox regression analyses were used to examine associations by cancer spread, adjusting for various confounders.

Results

Of 107,706 eligible men, 4257 developed incident PC up to end 2013. Risk of PC diagnosis increased with: PC family history (versus no family history of cancer; HR_adjusted = 1.36; 95% CI:1.21–1.52); father and brother(s) diagnosed with PC (versus cancer-free family history; HR_adjusted = 2.20; 95% CI:1.61–2.99); severe lower-urinary-tract symptoms (versus mild; HR_adjusted = 1.77; 95% CI:1.53–2.04) and vasectomy (versus none; HR_adjusted = 1.08; 95% CI:1.00–1.16). PC risk decreased with dispensed prescriptions (versus none) for BPH (HR_adjusted = 0.76; 95% CI:0.69–0.85) and metformin (HR_adjusted = 0.57; 95% CI:0.48–0.68). Advanced PC risk increased with vasectomy (HR_adjusted = 1.28; 95% CI:1.06–1.55) and being obese (versus normal weight; HR_adjusted = 1.31; 95% CI:1.01–1.69).

Conclusion

Vasectomy and obesity are associated with an increased risk of advanced PC. The reduced risk of localised and advanced PC associated with BPH, and diabetes prescriptions warrants investigation.

Metformin Treatment Among Men With Diabetes and the Risk of Prostate Cancer: A Population-Based Historical Cohort Study

There is conflicting evidence regarding the association between metformin treatment and prostate cancer risk in diabetic men. We investigated this association in a population-based Israeli cohort of 145,617 men aged 21–89 years with incident diabetes who were followed over the period 2002–2012. We implemented a time-dependent covariate Cox model, using weighted cumulative exposure to relate metformin history to prostate cancer risk, adjusting for use of other glucose-lowering medications, age, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status. To adjust for time-varying glucose control variables, we used inverse probability weighting of a marginal structural model. With 666,553 person-years of follow-up, 1,592 men were diagnosed with prostate cancer. Metformin exposure in the previous year was positively associated with prostate cancer risk (per defined daily dose; without adjustment for glucose control, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.53 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.19, 1.96); with adjustment, HR = 1.42 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.94)). However, exposure during the previous 2–7 years was negatively associated with risk (without adjustment for glucose control, HR = 0.58 (95% CI: 0.37, 0.93); with adjustment, HR = 0.60 (95% CI: 0.33, 1.09)). These positive and negative associations with previous-year and earlier metformin exposure, respectively, need to be confirmed and better understood.

Hormonal patterns in men with prediabetes and diabetes in NHANES III: possible links with prostate cancer

PURPOSE

Pathways involving sex hormones and insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) have been proposed to explain, in part, the lower risk of prostate cancer among men with diabetes. To gain insights into potential biological mechanisms we explored differences in serum concentrations of sex hormones and IGFs across the trajectory from normoglycemia to prediabetes to poorly controlled diabetes.

METHODS

Using cross-sectional data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III we examined differences in levels of circulating sex hormones, sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), IGF-1, and IFG-binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3), according to diabetes status: no diabetes [n = 648], prediabetes [n = 578], undiagnosed diabetes [n = 106], well-controlled diabetes [n = 42], and poorly controlled diabetes [n = 56]. Adjusted geometric mean concentrations were derived using multivariable linear regression, adjusted for age, race, and other lifestyle factors.

RESULTS

Total testosterone concentrations were lower among prediabetics (4.89 ng/mL, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.95-5.21) than men without prediabetes/diabetes (5.29 ng/mL, 95% CI 5.06-5.53) but did not reduce further across diabetes groups. Concentrations of estradiol, estimated free testosterone, SHGB, IGF-1, and IGFBP-3 did not differ. While the ratio of IGF-1 to IGFBP-3 was lower among men with prediabetics and undiagnosed diabetes than men without prediabetes/diabetes, there was no trend across groups. A positive trend for the ratio of estradiol-to-testosterone levels was observed across groups (p trend = 0.045).

CONCLUSION

Our findings do not provide clear support for either an androgen driven or IGF-driven pathway for the inverse association between diabetes and prostate cancer risk.

Antidiabetic Medications and the Risk of Prostate Cancer in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Antidiabetic medications (ADMs) may modify prostate cancer (PCa) risk in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Accordingly, the current study assessed the possible associations between ADMs and the risk of PCa in diabetics.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library) identified studies evaluating the associations between ADMs and incidence of PCa. A meta-analysis followed PRISMA was performed using odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) as effect measures.

RESULTS

In total of 47 studies involving 3,094,152 patients with diabetes were included. Results of meta-analysis of the observational studies suggested no significant association between metformin, thiazolidinediones, sulfonylureas, insulin or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors administration and the risk of PCa (All p-values > 0.05). Separate analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) revealed a significant reduction in PCa risk with thiazolidinediones (OR = 0.55, p = 0.04) or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) administration (OR = 0.53, p = 0.006), whereas no significant association was found in SGLT2 inhibitors (p = 0.3).

CONCLUSION

Thiazolidinediones or GLP-1RA administration may have benefits in PCa based on RCTs, however, further research is needed to confirm these findings.

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Cancer: Epidemiology, Physiopathology and Prevention

Individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus are at greater risk of developing cancer and of dying from it. Both diseases are age-related, contributing to the impact of population aging on the long-term sustainability of health care systems in European Union countries. The purpose of this narrative review was to describe, from epidemiological, pathophysiological and preventive perspectives, the links between type 2 diabetes mellitus and the most prevalent cancers in these patients. Multiple metabolic abnormalities that may occur in type 2 diabetes mellitus, particularly obesity, could explain the increased cancer risk. In addition, the effectiveness of drugs commonly used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus (e.g., metformin and thiazolidinediones) has been broadly evaluated in cancer prevention. Thus, a better understanding of the links between type 2 diabetes mellitus and cancer will help to identify the contributing factors and the pathophysiological pathways and to design personalized preventive strategies. The final goal is to facilitate healthy aging and the prevention of cancer and other diseases related with type 2 diabetes mellitus, which are among the main sources of disability and death in the European Union and worldwide.

Prevalent diabetes and risk of total, colorectal, prostate and breast cancers in an ageing population: meta-analysis of individual participant data from cohorts of the CHANCES consortium

BACKGROUND

We investigated whether associations between prevalent diabetes and cancer risk are pertinent to older adults and whether associations differ across subgroups of age, body weight status or levels of physical activity.

METHODS

We harmonised data from seven prospective cohort studies of older individuals in Europe and the United States participating in the CHANCES consortium. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate the associations of prevalent diabetes with cancer risk (all cancers combined, and for colorectum, prostate and breast). We calculated summary risk estimates across cohorts using pooled analysis and random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 667,916 individuals were included with an overall median (P25-P75) age at recruitment of 62.3 (57-67) years. During a median follow-up time of 10.5 years, 114,404 total cancer cases were ascertained. Diabetes was not associated with the risk of all cancers combined (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.86-1.04; I2 = 63.3%). Diabetes was positively associated with colorectal cancer risk in men (HR = 1.17; 95% CI: 1.08-1.26; I2 = 0%) and a similar HR in women (1.13; 95% CI: 0.82-1.56; I2 = 46%), but with a confidence interval including the null. Diabetes was inversely associated with prostate cancer risk (HR = 0.81; 95% CI: 0.77-0.85; I2 = 0%), but not with postmenopausal breast cancer (HR = 0.96; 95% CI: 0.89-1.03; I2 = 0%). In exploratory subgroup analyses, diabetes was inversely associated with prostate cancer risk only in men with overweight or obesity.

CONCLUSIONS

Prevalent diabetes was positively associated with colorectal cancer risk and inversely associated with prostate cancer risk in older Europeans and Americans.

The Influence of Anti-Diabetic Drugs on Prostate Cancer

The incidences of prostate cancer (PC) and diabetes are increasing, with a sustained trend. The occurrence of PC and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is growing with aging. The correlation between PC occurrence and diabetes is noteworthy, as T2DM is correlated with a reduced risk of incidence of prostate cancer. Despite this reduction, diabetes mellitus increases the mortality in many cancer types, including prostate cancer. The treatment of T2DM is based on lifestyle changes and pharmacological management. Current available drugs, except insulin, are aimed at increasing insulin secretion (sulfonylureas, incretin drugs), improving insulin sensitivity (biguanides, thiazolidinediones), or increasing urinary glucose excretion (gliflozin). Comorbidities should be taken into consideration during the treatment of T2DM. This review describes currently known information about the mechanism and impact of commonly used antidiabetic drugs on the incidence and progression of PC. Outcomes of pre-clinical studies are briefly presented and their correlations with available clinical trials have also been observed. Available reports and meta-analyses demonstrate that most anti-diabetic drugs do not increase the risk during the treatment of patients with PC. However, some reports show a potential advantage of treatment of T2DM with specific drugs. Based on clinical reports, use of metformin should be considered as a therapeutic option. Moreover, anticancer properties of metformin were augmented while combined with GLP-1 analogs.

To determine the effect of long-term antiepileptic drug on the serum folate and vitamin B12 among epileptic patients

The purpose of this study was to prevent anaemia caused on long-term phenytoin treatment among Epileptic patients. Therefore, two groups were categorised based on the duration of phenytoin namely, cases and control. The duration of Phenytoin treatment for case was > 2 years while control had < 1 year. The estimation of serum Folate and Vitamin B12 was carried out and the association between the deficiency of Vitamins with the duration of treatment were evaluated using Linear Regression Analysis. The statistical results shown that the mean value of Folate (2.61 ± 1.81) and the mean value of Vitamin B12 (284.68 ± 110.12) were considered to be low as the duration of Phenytoin treatment increases (> 2 years) compare to control with the Folate concentration of (7.01 ± 4.40) which was statistically significant (p < 0.000). The experimental results have proved that a long-term phenytoin treatment significantly affects the concentration of Folate and Vitamin B12 among the Epileptic patients vigorously.

Pharmacoepidemiological Evaluation in Prostate Cancer-Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

Simple Summary

Pharmacoepidemiologic research provides opportunities to evaluate how commonly used drug groups, such as cholesterol-lowering drugs, may affect the prostate cancer risk or mortality. However, such studies need to be carefully designed in order to avoid biases caused by systematic differences between medication users and non-users. Similarly, data must be carefully analyzed and interpreted while acknowledging possible biases that can lead to erroneous conclusions. Here, we review common pitfalls in such studies and describe ways to avoid them in an effort to aid future research.

Abstract

Pharmacoepidemiologic research provides opportunities to evaluate how commonly used drug groups, such as cholesterol-lowering or antidiabetic drugs, may affect the prostate cancer risk or mortality. This type of research is valuable in estimating real-life drug effects. Nonetheless, pharmacoepidemiological studies are prone to multiple sources of bias that mainly arise from systematic differences between medication users and non-users. If these are not appreciated and properly controlled for, there is a risk of obtaining biased results and reaching erroneous conclusions. Therefore, in order to improve the quality of future research, we describe common biases in pharmacoepidemiological studies, particularly in the context of prostate cancer research. We also list common ways to mitigate these biases and to estimate causality between medication use and cancer outcomes.

Clinical, Cellular, and Molecular Evidence of the Additive Antitumor Effects of Biguanides and Statins in Prostate Cancer

CONTEXT

Prostate cancer (PCa) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death among the male population worldwide. Unfortunately, current medical treatments fail to prevent PCa progression in a high percentage of cases; therefore, new therapeutic tools to tackle PCa are urgently needed. Biguanides and statins have emerged as antitumor agents for several endocrine-related cancers.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate: (1) the putative in vivo association between metformin and/or statins treatment and key tumor and clinical parameters and (2) the direct effects of different biguanides (metformin/buformin/phenformin), statins (atorvastatin/simvastatin/lovastatin), and their combination, on key functional endpoints and associated signalling mechanisms.

METHODS

An exploratory/observational retrospective cohort of patients with PCa (n = 75) was analyzed. Moreover, normal and tumor prostate cells (normal [RWPE-cells/primary prostate cell cultures]; tumor [LNCaP/22RV1/PC3/DU145 cell lines]) were used to measure proliferation/migration/tumorsphere-formation/signalling pathways.

RESULTS

The combination of metformin+statins in vivo was associated to lower Gleason score and longer biochemical recurrence-free survival. Moreover, biguanides and statins exerted strong antitumor actions (ie, inhibition of proliferation/migration/tumorsphere formation) on PCa cells, and that their combination further decreased; in addition, these functional parameters compared with the individual treatments. These actions were mediated through modulation of key oncogenic and metabolic signalling pathways (ie, AR/mTOR/AMPK/AKT/ERK) and molecular mediators (MKI67/cMYC/androgen receptor/cell-cycle inhibitors).

CONCLUSIONS

Biguanides and statins significantly reduced tumor aggressiveness in PCa, with this effect being more potent (in vitro and in vivo) when both compounds are combined. Therefore, given the demonstrated clinical safety of biguanides and statins, our results suggest a potential therapeutic role of these compounds, especially their combination, for the treatment of PCa.

Metformin use and long-term risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia: a population-based cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether metformin use affects risk of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) by comparing the risk of BPH in men with type 2 diabetes who initiated first-line treatment with either metformin or sulfonylurea monotherapy between 2000 or 2006 in Northern Denmark. In this period, sulfonylurea and metformin were both frequently used as first-line glucose-lowering drug (GLD) treatment.

DESIGN

A population-based cohort study.

SETTING

Northern Denmark.

PARTICIPANTS

All men who filled at least two prescriptions for metformin or for sulfonylurea, respectively, during their first 6 months of GLD treatment. Follow-up started 6 months after treatment start.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Rates of subsequent BPH, identified based on community prescriptions for BPH-related treatment or hospital BPH diagnoses, and rates of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Rates in metformin and sulfonylurea users were compared overall and stratified by 6-month haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c₎ using Cox regression and an intention-to-treat (ITT) approach and an as-treated analysis.

RESULTS

During follow-up, less than five persons were lost to follow-up due to emigration. In 3953 metformin initiators with a median follow-up of 10 years, the 10-year cumulative BPH incidence was 25.7% (95% CI 24.2 to 27.1). Compared with 5958 sulfonylurea users (median follow-up 8 years, 10-year cumulative incidence 27.4% (95% CI 26.2 to 28.6)), the crude HR for BPH was 0.83 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.89) and adjusted HR in the ITT analyses was 0.97 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.06). For TURP, the adjusted HR was 0.96 (95% CI 0.63 to 1.46). In the as-treated analysis, adjusted HR for BPH was 0.91 (95% CI 0.81 to 1.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with sulfonylurea, metformin did not substantially reduce the incidence of BPH in men with diabetes.

The suggested chemopreventive association of metformin with prostate cancer in diabetic patients

PURPOSE

Metformin, an insulin sensitizer, is the most common first-line antidiabetic therapy. There is increasing evidence suggesting metformin can prevent the emergence of prostate cancer (CaP). We aimed to analyze the chemopreventive role of metformin, in conjunction with other putative chemopreventive medications (statins, proton-pump-inhibitors, alpha-blockers, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors, diabetic medications) in a population-based cohort study.

METHODS

Data were incorporated from the Institute for Clinical and Evaluative Sciences to identify all diabetic men aged 66 and above with prior history of a negative prostate biopsy (PB) between 1994 and 2016, who were not on any of the medications prior to study inclusion. Multivariable Cox regression models with time-dependent covariates were used to assess the association of metformin to CaP diagnosis, subsequent PB, and use of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). All models were adjusted for age, rurality, comorbidity, and year of study inclusion.

RESULTS

Overall, 2,332 diabetic men were included, with a median follow-up time of 9.4 years (interquartile range 5.4-13.4 years). A total of 2,036 patients (87.3%) received metformin. Compared to non-metformin users, metformin use was associated with decreased CaP diagnosis rate (HR 0.69, 95%CI 0.54-0.88, P = 0.003), lower hazard of undergoing an additional PB (HR 0.64, 95%CI 0.44-0.95, P = 0.03), and receiving ADT (HR 0.72, 95%CI 0.54-0.96, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

Men receiving metformin were less likely to have suspected or diagnosed CaP, and in those with CaP, the use of ADT was less common. Ongoing prospective randomized studies will determine if these findings correspond to the suggested associations of metformin in the emergence and/or progression of CaP.

The Use of Metformin to Increase the Human Healthspan

Metformin is a safe, effective and useful drug for glucose management in patients with diabetes. However in recent years, more attention has been paid to the possibility of using metformin as an anti-aging drug. It was shown to significantly increase the lifespan in some model organisms and delay the onset of age-associated declines. The current review summarizes advances in clinical research on the potential role of metformin in the field of lifespan and healthspan extension. Growing amounts of evidence from clinical trials suggest that metformin can effectively reduce the risk of many age-related diseases and conditions, including cardiometabolic disorders, neurodegeneration, chronic inflammation and frailty. Metformin also holds promise as a drug that could be repurposed for chemoprevention or adjuvant therapy for certain types of cancer. Moreover, metformin induces autophagy by activation of AMPK and can thus be potentially used to promote heathspan by hormesis-like mechanisms. Although long-term intake of metformin is associated with low risk of adverse events, well-designed clinical trials are still required to uncover the potential use of this drug as a geroprotector.

Cancer Biology and Prevention in Diabetes

The available evidence suggests a complex relationship between diabetes and cancer. Epidemiological data suggest a positive correlation, however, in certain types of cancer, a more complex picture emerges, such as in some site-specific cancers being specific to type I diabetes but not to type II diabetes. Reports share common and differential mechanisms which affect the relationship between diabetes and cancer. We discuss the use of antidiabetic drugs in a wide range of cancer therapy and cancer therapeutics in the development of hyperglycemia, especially antineoplastic drugs which often induce hyperglycemia by targeting insulin/IGF-1 signaling. Similarly, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4), a well-known target in type II diabetes mellitus, has differential effects on cancer types. Past studies suggest a protective role of DPP-4 inhibitors, but recent studies show that DPP-4 inhibition induces cancer metastasis. Moreover, molecular pathological mechanisms of cancer in diabetes are currently largely unclear. The cancer-causing mechanisms in diabetes have been shown to be complex, including excessive ROS-formation, destruction of essential biomolecules, chronic inflammation, and impaired healing phenomena, collectively leading to carcinogenesis in diabetic conditions. Diabetes-associated epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) and endothelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EndMT) contribute to cancer-associated fibroblast (CAF) formation in tumors, allowing the epithelium and endothelium to enable tumor cell extravasation. In this review, we discuss the risk of cancer associated with anti-diabetic therapies, including DPP-4 inhibitors and SGLT2 inhibitors, and the role of catechol-o-methyltransferase (COMT), AMPK, and cell-specific glucocorticoid receptors in cancer biology. We explore possible mechanistic links between diabetes and cancer biology and discuss new therapeutic approaches.

Impact of glycemic traits, type 2 diabetes and metformin use on breast and prostate cancer risk: a Mendelian randomization study

OBJECTIVES

Observational studies suggest glycemic traits and type 2 diabetes are positively associated, and metformin inversely associated with breast and prostate cancer risk. However, observational studies are susceptible to unmeasured confounding while studies of metformin use are also vulnerable to immortal time bias. The use of Mendelian randomization may reduce confounding due to random allocation of relevant genetic markers at birth, and may reduce immortal time bias (for metformin-related variants analysis) since the start of exposure is at birth.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We identified strong genetic predictors of fasting glucose, glycated hemoglobin, and type 2 diabetes from the Meta-Analyses of Glucose and Insulin-related traits Consortium and Diabetes Genetics Replication And Meta-analysis Consortium (n=140 595 for glucose; n=123 665 for HbA1c; n=898 130 for type 2 diabetes) and of AMPK-instrumented HbA1c reduction as a proxy of metformin and applied them to large genome-wide association studies of breast cancer (Breast Cancer Association Consortium; BCAC) and prostate cancer (Prostate Cancer Association Group to Investigate Cancer-Associated Alterations in the Genome; PRACTICAL). We used inverse variance weighting to obtain estimates. Sensitivity analyses included use of MR-Egger, weighted median, exclusion of pleiotropic instruments, and validation using UK Biobank (breast cancer only).

RESULTS

There was no association of fasting glucose (OR 1.03 per mmol/L, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.25), HbA1c (OR 1.02 per %, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.45), or type 2 diabetes (OR 0.98 per log odds, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.01) with breast cancer in BCAC, with similar findings from UK Biobank. There was no association of fasting glucose (OR 0.93 per mmol/L, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.17), HbA1c (OR 0.90 per %, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.40) or type 2 diabetes (OR 1.02 per log odds, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.07) with prostate cancer in PRACTICAL. No strong evidence was observed for AMPK-instrumented HbA1c reduction on cancer risk.

CONCLUSION

Glycemic traits and type 2 diabetes unlikely cause breast and prostate cancer. Whether metformin can be repurposed for cancer prevention remains unclear.