Dataset Information

Sulfonylurea and Cancer Risk Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Population-Based Cohort Study

ABSTRACT:

Background

Current evidence of the association between the use of sulfonylurea and cancer risk is highly conflicting and little evidence of this association is from the mainland Chinese population. This study aimed to evaluate the potential effects of sulfonylurea use on cancer risk among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Methods

A retrospective cohort study of T2DM patients who were new users of sulfonylurea or metformin was conducted using the Yinzhou Regional Health Care Database. A marginal structural Cox model was used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of cancer associated with the use of sulfonylurea compared with metformin, with time-varying confounders controlled by inverse probability weighting. Secondary analyses using different glucose-lowering drugs (GLDs) as comparator and sensitivity analyses for potential bias due to latency period, model misspecification, missing data, analyses strategy (intention-to-treat and per-protocol), and diagnosis validation were performed to examine the robustness of the results.

Results

After fully controlling for time-varying confounding, baseline confounding, and competing risk, the use of sulfonylurea was not associated with the risk of any cancer (HR 1.09; 95% CI, 0.93–1.27), compared with the use of metformin. In the secondary analyses, compared with α - glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, glinides, other GLDs except sulfonylure and insulin, and T2DM patients not treated with sulfonylureas, the HRs of the association between sulfonylurea use and cancer risk were 0.92 (95% CI; 0.78–1.08), 0.89 (95% CI; 0.66–1.19), 0.85 (95% CI; 0.71–1.02), 1.04 (95% CI; 0.89–1.22), and 1.07 (95% CI; 0.99–1.16), respectively. The results of analyses for various subgroups, risk of site-specific cancers, cumulative duration, dose-response relationship, and sensitivity analyses of different latency periods and missing data were generally consistent with the findings of the primary analyses.

Conclusion

No association between sulfonylurea use and cancer risk was found in this study after properly controlling biases due to time-varying confounders and other sources. Further studies on the association between sulfonylurea use and the risk of cancer by using data from a Chinese population with higher representativeness are needed.

SUBMITTER: Zhao H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9279619 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are associated with an increased risk of cholangiocarcinoma in adults with type 2 diabetes.DesignPopulation based cohort study.SettingGeneral practices contributing data to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink.Participants154?162 adults newly treated with antidiabetic drugs between 1 January 2007 and 31 March 2017, followed until 31 March 2018.Main outcome measuresUse of DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists was modelled as a time varying variable and compared with use of other second or third line antidiabetic drugs. All exposures were lagged by one year to account for cancer latency and to minimise reverse causality. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals of incident cholangiocarcinoma associated with use of DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists, separately. A post hoc pharmacovigilance analysis was conducted using the World Health Organization's global individual case safety report database, VigiBase, to estimate reporting odds ratios of cholangiocarcinoma.ResultsDuring 614?274 person years of follow-up, 105 incident cholangiocarcinoma events occurred (rate 17.1 per 100?000 person years). Use of DPP-4 inhibitors was associated with a 77% increased hazard of cholangiocarcinoma (hazard ratio 1.77, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 3.01). Use of GLP-1 receptor agonists was associated with an increased hazard with a wide confidence interval (hazard ratio 1.97, 0.83 to 4.66). In the pharmacovigilance analysis, the use of DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists were both associated with increased reporting odds ratios for cholangiocarcinoma, compared with use of sulfonylureas or thiazolidinediones (1.63, 1.00 to 2.66, 4.73, 2.95 to 7.58, respectively).ConclusionCompared with use of other second or third line antidiabetic drugs, use of DPP-4 inhibitors, and possibly GLP-1 receptor agonists, might be associated with an increased risk of cholangiocarcinoma in adults with type 2 diabetes.

Project description:BackgroundCross-sectional studies found that frailty was associated with prevalent diabetic microvascular complications (DMC). Longitudinal evidence in this regard is inconclusive and insufficient. We aimed to prospectively evaluate the association of pre-frailty and frailty with DMC in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).MethodsWe included 18,062 adults (mean age 59.4 ± 7.2 years, 37.4% female) with T2D at baseline in the UK Biobank. Frailty was defined using the frailty phenotype according to five components (weight loss, exhaustion, low physical activity, slow gait speed, and low grip strength). DMC, defined as diabetic nephropathy, diabetic neuropathy, or diabetic retinopathy, was identified using hospital inpatient records and death registries. Cox proportional hazard regression models considering competing risks were used to evaluate the associations of frailty phenotype with overall DMC events and subtypes.ResultsAmong all participants, 6101 (33.8%) were classified as non-frail, 10,073 (55.8%) were classified as pre-frail, and 1888 (10.4%) were classified as frail. During a median follow-up of 12.0 years, 3678 DMC cases were documented, including 2213 diabetic nephropathy, 1520 diabetic retinopathy, and 673 diabetic neuropathy events. In the multivariable-adjusted model, compared with participants with non-frail, both pre-frailty and frailty were significantly associated with increased risk of overall DMC (HR 1.10, 95% CI: [1.02, 1.18] for pre-frailty and HR 1.52 [95% CI: 1.36, 1.69] for frailty). Similar results were observed in the subtypes of DMC. For each one-point increase in frailty phenotype score, the risk of overall DMC, diabetic nephropathy, diabetic retinopathy, and diabetic neuropathy event increased by 13%, 16%, 10%, and 20%, respectively.ConclusionsBoth pre-frailty and frailty were associated with an increased risk of DMC in patients with T2D. These findings have important implications for integrating early assessment and surveillance of frailty in diabetes and may favor the identification of at-risk patients.

Project description:BackgroundAngiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) may have protective effects against dementia occurrence in patients with hypertension (HTN). However, whether telmisartan, an ARB with peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor γ (PPAR-γ)-modulating effects, has additional benefits compared to other ARBs remains unclear.Methods and findingsBetween 1997 and 2013, 2,166,944 type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients were identified from the National Health Insurance Research Database of Taiwan. Patients with HTN using ARBs were included in the study. Patients with a history of stroke, traumatic brain injury, or dementia were excluded. Finally, 65,511 eligible patients were divided into 2 groups: the telmisartan group and the non-telmisartan ARB group. Propensity score matching (1:4) was used to balance the distribution of baseline characteristics and medications. The primary outcome was the diagnosis of dementia. The secondary outcomes included the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease and occurrence of symptomatic ischemic stroke (IS), any IS, and all-cause mortality. The risks between groups were compared using a Cox proportional hazard model. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. There were 2,280 and 9,120 patients in the telmisartan and non-telmisartan ARB groups, respectively. Patients in the telmisartan group had a lower risk of dementia diagnosis (telmisartan versus non-telmisartan ARBs: 2.19% versus 3.20%; HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.97; p = 0.030). They also had lower risk of dementia diagnosis with IS as a competing risk (subdistribution HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.95; p = 0.022) and with all-cause mortality as a competing risk (subdistribution HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.97; p = 0.029). In addition, the telmisartan users had a lower risk of any IS (6.84% versus 8.57%; HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.94; p = 0.008) during long-term follow-up. Study limitations included potential residual confounding by indication, interpretation of causal effects in an observational study, and bias caused by using diagnostic and medication codes to represent real clinical data.ConclusionsThe current study suggests that telmisartan use in hypertensive T2DM patients may be associated with a lower risk of dementia and any IS events in an East-Asian population.