We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Comparison between sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors on the risk of incident cancer in patients with diabetes mellitus: A real-world evidence study.
Diabetes/metabolism Research and Reviews 2024 March
AIMS: Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) have been demonstrated to be associated with cancer cell mechanisms. However, whether they increase the risk of cancer remains unclear. Thus, this study aimed to determine the association between SGLT-2i use and the incidence of cancer in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) in Taiwan.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was based on the Taiwan National Health Insurance database. The study population comprised patients with DM, and those who first used SGLT-2is during 2016-2018 were assigned to the study group. Greedy propensity score matching was performed to select patients who first used dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4is), and these patients were assigned to the control group. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for cancer risk in the study and control groups; this model was adjusted for demographic characteristics, DM severity, comorbidities and concomitant medication use.
RESULTS: After controlling for relevant variables, the SGLT-2i cohort (aHR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.87-0.93) had a significantly lower risk of developing cancer than the DPP-4i cohort, particularly when the SGLT-2i was dapagliflozin (aHR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.87-0.95) or empagliflozin (aHR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.86-0.94). Regarding cancer type, the SGLT-2i cohort's risk of cancer was significantly lower than that of the DPP-4i cohort for leukaemia, oesophageal, colorectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, skin and bladder cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: SGLT-2i use was associated with a significantly lower risk of cancer than DPP-4i use.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was based on the Taiwan National Health Insurance database. The study population comprised patients with DM, and those who first used SGLT-2is during 2016-2018 were assigned to the study group. Greedy propensity score matching was performed to select patients who first used dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4is), and these patients were assigned to the control group. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for cancer risk in the study and control groups; this model was adjusted for demographic characteristics, DM severity, comorbidities and concomitant medication use.
RESULTS: After controlling for relevant variables, the SGLT-2i cohort (aHR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.87-0.93) had a significantly lower risk of developing cancer than the DPP-4i cohort, particularly when the SGLT-2i was dapagliflozin (aHR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.87-0.95) or empagliflozin (aHR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.86-0.94). Regarding cancer type, the SGLT-2i cohort's risk of cancer was significantly lower than that of the DPP-4i cohort for leukaemia, oesophageal, colorectal, liver, pancreatic, lung, skin and bladder cancer.
CONCLUSIONS: SGLT-2i use was associated with a significantly lower risk of cancer than DPP-4i use.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Executive Summary: State-of-the-Art Review: Unintended Consequences: Risk of Opportunistic Infections Associated with Long-term Glucocorticoid Therapies in Adults.Clinical Infectious Diseases 2024 April 11
Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemias: Classifications, Pathophysiology, Diagnoses and Management.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 13
Clinical practice guidelines on the management of status epilepticus in adults: A systematic review.Epilepsia 2024 April 13
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app