The Effect of Metformin on Male Reproductive Function and Prostate: An Updated Review

Clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of metformin in different patient populations: A narrative review of real-world evidence

Over the past two decades, diabetes pharmacopoeia has flourished, with new drugs that, on top of their glucose-lowering efficacy, have been shown to protect the heart and the kidney. Despite these new opportunities, metformin retains a pivotal role among glucose-lowering agents. As one of the few available insulin sensitizers, metformin is an effective, safe, and overall well-tolerated drug backed by over 60 years of clinical experience, including evidence for potential benefits beyond glucose reduction across different ages, sexes, genetic backgrounds, geographical areas, and stages of disease. Although there is some discussion of whether metformin offers the most effective front-line option in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D), it remains a natural companion to all other glucose-lowering agents. Furthermore, metformin comes at a very low cost and, as such, it has extremely high cost-effectiveness, particularly given the serious economic burden associated with diabetes complications. This financial advantage is particularly relevant in resource-constrained healthcare systems, where the affordability of metformin may be instrumental in implementing an effective treatment in an evergrowing number of individuals. We present here compelling real-world evidence in support of the clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of metformin across different patient populations, highlighting areas where more population-based studies are needed to further incorporate and consolidate its use in the pharmacological management of T2D.

Paternal Use of Metformin During the Sperm Development Period Preceding Conception and Risk for Major Congenital Malformations in Newborns

BACKGROUND

Metformin is the most used oral antidiabetic medication. Despite its established safety profile, it has known antiandrogenic and epigenetic modifying effects. This raised concerns about possible adverse developmental effects caused by genomic alterations related to paternal use of metformin during the spermatogenesis period preceding conception.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the potential adverse intergenerational effect of metformin by examining the association between paternal metformin use during spermatogenesis and major congenital malformations (MCMs) in newborns.

DESIGN

Nationally representative cohort study.

SETTING

A large Israeli health fund.

PARTICIPANTS

383 851 live births linked to fathers and mothers that occurred in 1999 to 2020.

MEASUREMENTS

MCMs and parental cardiometabolic conditions were ascertained using clinical diagnoses, medication dispensing information, and laboratory test results. The effect of metformin use on MCMs was estimated using general estimating equations, accounting for concurrent use of other antidiabetic medications and parental cardiometabolic morbidity.

RESULTS

Compared with unexposed fathers, the prevalence of cardiometabolic morbidity was substantially higher among fathers who used metformin during spermatogenesis, and their spouses. Whereas the crude odds ratio (OR) for paternal metformin exposure in all formulations and MCMs was 1.28 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.64), the adjusted OR was 1.00 (CI, 0.76 to 1.31). Within specific treatment regimens, the adjusted OR was 0.86 (CI, 0.60 to 1.23) for metformin in monotherapy and 1.36 (CI, 1.00 to 1.85) for metformin in polytherapy, a treatment that was more common in patients with more poorly controlled diabetes.

LIMITATION

Laboratory test results for hemoglobin A1c to assess underlying diabetes severity were available only for a subset of the cohort.

CONCLUSION

Paternal use of metformin in monotherapy does not increase the risk for MCMs. Association for metformin in polytherapy could potentially be explained by worse underlying parental cardiometabolic risk profile.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

None.

Infertility Improvement after Medical Weight Loss in Women and Men: A Review of the Literature

Infertility is a modern health problem. Obesity is another expanding health issue associated with chronic diseases among which infertility is also included. This review will focus on the effects of weight loss by medical therapy on fertility regarding reproductive hormonal profile, ovulation rates, time to pregnancy, implantation rates, pregnancy rates, normal embryo development, and live birth rates. We comprised medicine already used for weight loss, such as orlistat and metformin, and emerging medical treatments, such as Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA). Their use is not recommended during a planned pregnancy, and they should be discontinued in such cases. The main outcomes of this literature review are the following: modest weight loss after medication and the duration of the treatment are important factors for fertility improvement. The fecundity outcomes upon which medical-induced weight loss provides significant results are the female reproductive hormonal profile, menstrual cyclicity, ovulation and conception rates, and pregnancy rates. Regarding the male reproductive system, the fertility outcomes that feature significant alterations after medically induced weight loss are as follows: the male reproductive hormonal profile, sperm motility, movement and morphology, weight of reproductive organs, and sexual function. The newer promising GLP-1 RAs show expectations regarding fertility improvement, as they have evidenced encouraging effects on improving ovulation rates and regulating the menstrual cycle. However, more human studies are needed to confirm this. Future research should aim to provide answers about whether medical weight loss therapies affect fertility indirectly through weight loss or by a possible direct action on the reproductive system.

The role of red ginseng in men's reproductive health: a literature review

BACKGROUND

Red ginseng (RG) is a traditional herb commonly used in China, Korea, and other East Asian countries. Recently, it has demonstrated a better clinical value in men's reproductive health (MRH). The present review aimed to examine the effects of RG treatment on MRH.

RESULTS

Overall, 42 articles related to RG application in MRH were reviewed, of which 31 were animal experiments and 11 were clinical studies. Furthermore, this review analyzed the use of RG in some male reproductive diseases in clinical trials and determined the associated mechanisms of action. The mechanism of action of RG in MRH may be related to oxidative stress, regulation of sex hormones and spermatogenesis-related proteins, and anti-inflammation.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of RG for the treatment of male infertility, erectile dysfunction, and prostate diseases has the potential to contribute to MRH.

The Risk of Age-Related Macular Degeneration Is Reduced in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Who Use Metformin

Background: Whether metformin may reduce the risk of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) requires confirmation. This study compared the risk of AMD between ever users and never users of metformin matched on propensity score (PS) in Taiwanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: We enrolled study subjects from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance. A total of 423,949 patients with new onset diabetes from 1999 to 2005 were identified. After excluding ineligible patients and enrolling only patients aged between 50 and 79 years, we created 13,303 pairs of ever users and never users of metformin matched on PS. The patients were followed from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2011. We estimated hazard ratios by Cox regression. Results: AMD was newly diagnosed in 506 ever users and 639 never users. The respective incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) were 778.72 and 1016.62. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for ever versus never users was 0.756 (0.673–0.850). While ever users were categorized by tertiles of cumulative duration (<31.8, 31.8–63.9 and >63.9 months) and cumulative dose (<947.1, 947.1–2193.5 and >2193.5 g) of metformin, a dose–response pattern was observed. For the respective tertiles of cumulative duration, the HRs (95% CIs) were 1.131 (0.961–1.330), 0.821 (0.697–0.967) and 0.464 (0.384–0.561), while compared to never users. For the respective tertiles of cumulative dose, the HRs (95% CIs) were 1.131 (0.962–1.329), 0.739 (0.624–0.876) and 0.525 (0.438–0.629). A risk reduction among ever users was observed for all tertiles of defined daily dose but was most remarkable for the third tertile with a defined daily dose of >0.64. Subgroup analyses suggested that the benefit of metformin could be similarly observed among men and women and for age subgroups of 50–64 and 65–79 years. However, patients with diabetic retinopathy would not be significantly benefited and metformin did not seem to be preventive for exudative AMD. Conclusion: In general, metformin significantly reduces the risk of AMD.

Metformin Reduces the Risk of Hearing Loss: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the risk of hearing loss with regard to metformin exposure.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Taiwan's National Health Insurance database.

METHODS

We enrolled 292,071 ever users and 18,200 never users of metformin with new-onset diabetes mellitus from 1999 to 2005 and followed them for hearing loss from January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2011. Hazard ratios (HRs) weighted by propensity score were estimated.

RESULTS

Hearing loss was newly diagnosed in 10,085 ever users and 1072 never users. Their respective incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) were 738.09 and 1366.83. The HR comparing ever-to-never users was 0.534 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.501-0.569]. The HR (95% CI) for the first (<27.07 months), second (27.07-59.13 months), and third (>59.13 months) tertiles of cumulative duration of metformin therapy were 0.912 (0.852-0.975), 0.544 (0.508-0.582), and 0.275 (0.255-0.295), respectively; and were 0.900 (0.841-0.962), 0.531 (0.496-0.569), and 0.293 (0.273-0.315), respectively, for the first (<796.70 g), second (796.70-2020.15 g), and third (>2020.15 g) tertiles of cumulative dose. The magnitude of risk reduction became more remarkable in corresponding to the increasing tertiles of the defined daily dose prescribed. Subtype analyses suggested that the risk reduction was more significant for sensorineural than conductive hearing loss. Findings derived from a propensity score-matched cohort did not substantially change the conclusions, and the risk reduction for mixed hearing loss was not statistically significant in the matched cohort as significantly observed in the unmatched cohort.

CONCLUSION

The risk of hearing loss is reduced in a dose-response pattern in patients who use metformin.

Effect of Metformin on Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Male Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Retrospective Cohort Study in Taiwan

PURPOSE

This study investigated the risk of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS)/benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) associated with metformin use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We used the database of Taiwan's National Health Insurance to create 9,833 pairs of ever users and never users of metformin matched on propensity score. They were males with a new diagnosis of type 2 diabetes during 1999-2005. The incidence of LUTS/BPH was calculated from January 1, 2006 until December 31, 2011. We estimated hazard ratios by Cox regression weighted on propensity score.

RESULTS

There were 515 incident cases in ever users after a median follow-up of 5.4 years (incidence rate: 11.24 per 1,000 person-years) and 682 cases in never users after 5.2 years (15.92 per 1,000 person-years). The hazard ratio (HR) that compared ever to never users was 0.69 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62-0.78). The HRs that compared ever users categorized into quartiles of cumulative duration (<19.33, 19.33-41.56, 41.57-67.17, and >67.17 mo) to never users were 1.02 (0.84-1.23), 1.01 (0.86-1.20), 0.57 (0.47-0.69), and 0.40 (0.32-0.49), respectively. For the quartiles of cumulative dose of <582.00, 582.00-1,361.00, 1,361.01-2,449.00, and >2,449.00 g, the respective HRs were 1.03 (0.85-1.24), 0.96 (0.81-1.13), 0.60 (0.49-0.72), and 0.40 (0.32-0.50). The lower risk was significant in all quartiles of defined daily dose. However, a larger daily dose was associated with a greater risk reduction. There were no significant interactions between metformin and other antidiabetic drugs. Patients who used rosiglitazone and/or pioglitazone without metformin had a significantly higher risk (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.09-1.63) and a combination with metformin attenuated such an adverse impact (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66-0.91).

CONCLUSIONS

A significantly lower risk of LUTS/BPH is observed in males with type 2 diabetes who use metformin.

The Risk of Multiple Myeloma Is Reduced in Metformin Initiators: A Retrospective Cohort Study in Taiwanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND

Whether metformin might reduce the risk of multiple myeloma (MM) has not been extensively researched in humans.

METHODS

The study subjects were enrolled from the reimbursement database of Taiwan's National Health Insurance. A total of 739,553 patients who had a new diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus during 1999-2009 were identified. They were categorized as metformin initiators (metformin (+)) and non-metformin initiators (metformin (-)) based on the prescriptions of antidiabetic drugs that included metformin and did not include metformin within the initial 12 months, respectively. MM incidence was calculated after the initial 12 months of treatment group assignment until 31 December 2011. Hazard ratios based on intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) approaches were estimated by Cox regression weighted by propensity scores.

RESULTS

In the ITT analyses, the respective incidence rates for 497,248 metformin (+) and 242,305 metformin (-) were 9.97 and 14.33 per 100,000 person-years. The hazard ratio that compared metformin (+) to metformin (-) in the ITT analysis was 0.710 (95% confidence interval 0.593-0.850). In the PP analysis, the respective incidence rates were 5.14 and 13.98 per 100,000 person-years, and the hazard ratio was 0.355 (95% confidence interval, 0.270-0.466). The lower risk of MM among metformin (+) was supported by subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Type 2 diabetes patients who are initiated with metformin treatment have a significantly lower risk of MM, especially when they adhere to metformin treatment.

Metformin’s effects on varicocele, erectile dysfunction, infertility and prostate-related diseases: A retrospective cohort study

Objectives: To investigate the risk of varicocele, erectile dysfunction (ED), infertility, prostatitis, benign prostate hyperplasia (BPH) and prostate cancer associated with metformin use.

Materials and methods: A total of 261,838 males, mean age 52.39 years (SD: 11.39), with a new-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus in 1999–2009 were identified from Taiwan’s National Health Insurance. Among them, 175,171 were metformin initiators [metformin (+)] and 86,667 were non-metformin initiators [metformin (−)] in the initial 12-month prescriptions of antidiabetic drugs. Follow-up started after the initial 12-month prescriptions. Outcomes were followed up until 31 December 2011. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) hazard ratios comparing metformin (+) to metformin (−) were estimated by Cox regression incorporated with the inverse probability of treatment-weighting using propensity scores.

Results: The median follow-up time ranged 5.55–6.82 years in metformin (−) and 4.36–5.17 years in metformin (+) for different outcomes in ITT analyses. The respective median follow-up time in PP analyses ranged 2.20–2.61 years in metformin (−) and ranged 3.99–4.65 years in metformin (+). In the ITT analyses, for metformin (−), the incidence rates (per 100,000 person-years) of varicocele, ED, infertility, prostatitis, BPH and prostate cancer were 26.42, 455.89, 22.82, 590.23, 4226.19, and 141.69, respectively; and the respective incidence rates for metformin (+) were 25.65, 488.10, 32.60, 510.30, 3685.66, and 116.57. The hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) comparing metformin (+) to metformin (−) in the ITT analyses were 0.960 (0.784–1.174) for varicocele, 1.077 (1.026–1.130) for ED, 1.368 (1.116–1.676) for infertility, 0.887 (0.849–0.927) for prostatitis, 0.883 (0.868–0.899) for BPH and 0.878 (0.802–0.961) for prostate cancer. The hazard ratios for the respective outcomes in the PP analyses were 0.845 (0.662–1.078), 1.350 (1.264–1.441), 1.396 (1.078–1.808), 0.800 (0.756–0.846), 0.875 (0.855–0.895), and 0.613 (0.548–0.686).

Conclusion: Metformin use in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is associated with a neutral effect on varicocele, a higher risk of sexual dysfunction (ED and infertility) and a reduced risk of prostate-related health (prostatitis, BPH and prostate cancer).

Diabetes as a potential compounding factor in COVID-19-mediated male subfertility

Recent work indicates that male fertility is compromised by SARS-CoV-2 infection. Direct effects derive from the presence of viral entry receptors (ACE2 and/or CD147) on the surface of testicular cells, such as spermatocytes, Sertoli cells, and Leydig cells. Indirect effects on testis and concentrations of male reproductive hormones derive from (1) virus-stimulated inflammation; (2) viral-induced diabetes, and (3) an interaction between diabetes and inflammation that exacerbates the deleterious effect of each perturbation. Reproductive hormones affected include testosterone, luteinizing hormone, and follicle-stimulating hormone. Reduction of male fertility is also observed with other viral infections, but the global pandemic of COVID-19 makes demographic and public health implications of reduced male fertility of major concern, especially if it occurs in the absence of serious symptoms that would otherwise encourage vaccination. Clinical documentation of COVID-19-associated male subfertility is now warranted to obtain quantitative relationships between infection severity and subfertility; mechanistic studies using animal models may reveal ways to mitigate the problem. In the meantime, the possibility of subfertility due to COVID-19 should enter considerations of vaccine hesitancy by reproductive-age males.

Metformin: Sex/Gender Differences in Its Uses and Effects—Narrative Review

Metformin (MTF) occupies a major and fundamental position in the therapeutic management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Gender differences in some effects and actions of MTF have been reported. Women are usually prescribed lower MTF doses compared to men and report more gastrointestinal side effects. The incidence of cardiovascular events in women on MTF has been found to be lower to that of men on MTF. Despite some promising results with MTF regarding pregnancy rates in women with PCOS, the management of gestational diabetes, cancer prevention or adjunctive cancer treatment and COVID-19, most robust meta-analyses have yet to confirm such beneficial effects.

Metformin and risk of gingival/periodontal diseases in diabetes patients: A retrospective cohort study

AIM

To compare the risk of gingival and periodontal diseases (GPD) between ever users and never users of metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

The Taiwan's National Health Insurance database was used to enroll 423,949 patients with new onset diabetes mellitus from 1999 to 2005. After excluding ineligible patients, 60,309 ever users and 5578 never users were followed up for the incidence of GPD from January 1, 2006 until December 31, 2011. Propensity score-weighted hazard ratios were estimated by Cox regression.

RESULTS

GPD was newly diagnosed in 18,528 ever users (incidence: 7746.51 per 100,000 person-years) and 2283 never users (incidence: 12158.59 per 100,000 person-years). The hazard ratio that compared ever users to never users was 0.627 (95% confidence interval: 0.600-0.655). When metformin use was categorized by tertiles of cumulative duration and cumulative dose, the risk significantly reduced in a dose-response pattern when the cumulative duration reached approximately 2 years or the cumulative dose reached 670 grams. Analyses on the tertiles of defined daily dose of metformin showed that the reduction of GPD risk could be seen in all three subgroups but the benefit would be greater when the daily dose increased.

CONCLUSION

Long-term use of metformin is associated with a significantly reduced risk of GPD.

The Effects of Separate and Combined Treatment of Male Rats with Type 2 Diabetes with Metformin and Orthosteric and Allosteric Agonists of Luteinizing Hormone Receptor on Steroidogenesis and Spermatogenesis

In men with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), steroidogenesis and spermatogenesis are impaired. Metformin and the agonists of luteinizing hormone/human chorionic gonadotropin(hCG)-receptor (LH/hCG-R) (hCG, low-molecular-weight allosteric LH/hCG-R-agonists) can be used to restore them. The aim was to study effectiveness of separate and combined administration of metformin, hCG and 5-amino-N-tert-butyl-2-(methylsulfanyl)-4-(3-(nicotinamido)phenyl)thieno[2,3-d]pyrimidine-6-carboxamide (TP3) on steroidogenesis and spermatogenesis in male rats with T2DM. hCG (15 IU/rat/day) and TP3 (15 mg/kg/day) were injected in the last five days of five-week metformin treatment (120 mg/kg/day). Metformin improved testicular steroidogenesis and spermatogenesis and restored LH/hCG-R-expression. Compared to control, in T2DM, hCG stimulated steroidogenesis and StAR-gene expression less effectively and, after five-day administration, reduced LH/hCG-R-expression, while TP3 effects changed weaker. In co-administration of metformin and LH/hCG-R-agonists, on the first day, stimulating effects of LH/hCG-R-agonists on testosterone levels and hCG-stimulated expression of StAR- and CYP17A1-genes were increased, but on the 3-5th day, they disappeared. This was due to reduced LH/hCG-R-gene expression and increased aromatase-catalyzed estradiol production. With co-administration, LH/hCG-R-agonists did not contribute to improving spermatogenesis, induced by metformin. Thus, in T2DM, metformin and LH/hCG-R-agonists restore steroidogenesis and spermatogenesis, with metformin being more effective in restoring spermatogenesis, and their co-administration improves LH/hCG-R-agonist-stimulating testicular steroidogenesis in acute but not chronic administration.

Hallmarks of Testicular Aging: The Challenge of Anti-Inflammatory and Antioxidant Therapies Using Natural and/or Pharmacological Compounds to Improve the Physiopathological Status of the Aged Male Gonad

The evolutionary theory of aging supports a trade-off relationship between reproduction and aging. Aging of the male reproductive system primarily affects the testes, leading to a decrease in the levels of sexual hormones, alterations in sperm quality and production, and a decline in fertility that does not necessarily involve a complete cessation of spermatogenesis. Inflammation, oxidation, and apoptosis are events considered as predictors of pathogenesis and the development of age-related diseases that are frequently observed in aged testes. Although the molecular mechanisms are still poorly understood, accumulating evidence points toward pro-inflammatory molecules and reactive oxygen species as primary contributing factors for testicular aging. However, the real impact of aging-related testicular alterations on fertility, reproductive health, and life span is far from being fully revealed. This work discusses the current knowledge on the impact of aging in the testis, particularly of aging-related dysregulated inflammation and oxidative damage on the functioning of its different cell populations. More interestingly, this review covers the potential benefits of anti-aging interventions and therapies using either pharmacological compounds (such as non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medication) or more natural alternatives (such as various nutraceuticals or even probiotics) that exhibit anti-inflammatory, antioxidant, and anti-apoptotic properties. Some of these are currently being investigated or are already in clinical use to delay or prevent testicular aging.