Dataset Information

Effect of metformin on cancer risk and treatment outcome of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of epidemiological observational studies.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Laboratory studies have shown the anti-tumor effect of metformin on prostate cancer. However, recent epidemiological studies have yielded inconclusive results.

Methods

We searched PubMed database from the inception to May 30 2014 for studies which assessed the effect of metformin use on cancer risk of prostate cancer, biochemical recurrence (BCR) and all-cause mortality of patients with prostate cancer. The pooled results and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated by random-effect model.

Results

Twenty-one studies were eligible according to the inclusion criteria. Based on the pooled results of available observational studies, metformin use was significantly associated with a decreased cancer risk (14 datasets, 963991 male subjects, odds ratio: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.85-0.97) and BCR (6 datasets, 2953 patients, hazard ratio: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.68-0.98) of prostate cancer. However, the association of metformin use with all-cause mortality of patients with prostate cancer was not significant (5 datasets, 9241 patients, hazard ratio: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.64-1.14).

Conclusion

Results suggest that metformin use appears to be associated with a significant reduction in the cancer risk and BCR of prostate cancer, but not in all-cause mortality of patients with prostate cancer.

SUBMITTER: Yu H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4278883 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of metformin on cancer risk and treatment outcome of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of epidemiological observational studies.

Yu Hongliang H Yin Li L Jiang Xuesong X Sun Xiujin X Wu Jing J Tian Hao H Gao Xianshu X He Xia X

PloS one 20141229 12

<h4>Background</h4>Laboratory studies have shown the anti-tumor effect of metformin on prostate cancer. However, recent epidemiological studies have yielded inconclusive results.<h4>Methods</h4>We searched PubMed database from the inception to May 30 2014 for studies which assessed the effect of metformin use on cancer risk of prostate cancer, biochemical recurrence (BCR) and all-cause mortality of patients with prostate cancer. The pooled results and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimate ...[more]

PMID: 25545701

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThis meta-epidemiological study aimed to assess methodological quality of a sample of contemporary non-randomised clinical studies of clinical interventions.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study of observational studies published between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2018. Studies were identified in PubMed using search terms 'association', 'observational,' 'non-randomised' 'comparative effectiveness' within titles or abstracts. Each study was appraised against 35 quality criteria by two authors independently, with each criterion rated fully, partially or not satisfied. These quality criteria were grouped into 6 categories: justification for observational design (n = 2); minimisation of bias in study design and data collection (n = 11); use of appropriate methods to create comparable groups (n = 6); appropriate adjustment of observed effects (n = 5); validation of observed effects (n = 9); and authors interpretations (n = 2).ResultsOf 50 unique studies, 49 (98%) were published in two US general medical journals. No study fully satisfied all applicable criteria; the mean (+/-SD) proportion of applicable criteria fully satisfied across all studies was 72% (+/- 10%). The categories of quality criteria demonstrating the lowest proportions of fully satisfied criteria were measures used to adjust observed effects (criteria 20, 23, 24) and validate observed effects (criteria 25, 27, 33). Criteria associated with ≤50% of full satisfaction across studies, where applicable, comprised: imputation methods to account for missing data (50%); justification for not performing an RCT (42%); interaction analyses in identifying independent prognostic factors potentially influencing intervention effects (42%); use of statistical correction to minimise type 1 error in multiple outcome analyses (33%); clinically significant effect sizes (30%); residual bias analyses for unmeasured or unknown confounders (14%); and falsification tests for residual confounding (8%). The proportions of fully satisfied criteria did not change over time.ConclusionsRecently published observational studies fail to fully satisfy more than one in four quality criteria. Criteria that were not or only partially satisfied were identified which serve as remediable targets for researchers and journal editors.

Project description:BackgroundTo summarize the up-to-date empirical evidence on trial-level characteristics of randomized controlled trials associated with treatment effect estimates.MethodsA systematic review searched three databases up to August 2020. Meta-epidemiological (ME) studies of randomized controlled trials on intervention effect were eligible. We assessed the methodological quality of ME studies using a self-developed criterion. Associations between treatment effect estimates and trial-level characteristics were presented using forest plots.ResultsEighty ME studies were included, with 25/80 (31%) being published after 2015. Less than one-third ME studies critically appraised the included studies (26/80, 33%), published a protocol (23/80, 29%), and provided a list of excluded studies with justifications (12/80, 15%). Trials with high or unclear (versus low) risk of bias on sequence generation (3/14 for binary outcome and 1/6 for continuous outcome), allocation concealment (11/18 and 1/6), double blinding (5/15 and 2/4) and smaller sample size (4/5 and 2/2) significantly associated with larger treatment effect estimates. Associations between high or unclear risk of bias on allocation concealment (5/6 for binary outcome and 1/3 for continuous outcome), double blinding (4/5 and 1/3) and larger treatment effect estimates were more frequently observed for subjective outcomes. The associations between treatment effect estimates and non-blinding of outcome assessors were removed in trials using multiple observers to reach consensus for both binary and continuous outcomes. Some trial characteristics in the Cochrane risk-of-bias (RoB2) tool have not been covered by the included ME studies, including using validated method for outcome measures and selection of the reported results from multiple outcome measures or multiple analysis based on results (e.g., significance of the results).ConclusionsConsistently significant associations between larger treatment effect estimates and high or unclear risk of bias on sequence generation, allocation concealment, double blinding and smaller sample size were found. The impact of allocation concealment and double blinding were more consistent for subjective outcomes. The methodological and reporting quality of included ME studies were dissatisfactory. Future ME studies should follow the corresponding reporting guideline. Specific guidelines for conducting and critically appraising ME studies are needed.

Dataset Information

Effect of metformin on cancer risk and treatment outcome of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of epidemiological observational studies.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Effect of metformin on cancer risk and treatment outcome of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of epidemiological observational studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets