Similar risk of malignancy with insulin glargine and neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes: findings from a 5 year randomised, open-label study

Non-Insulin Antidiabetic Agents and Lung Cancer Risk in Drug-Naive Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study

Lung cancer (LC) is the second most common cancer and the leading cause of cancer deaths in the U.S. Insulin therapy, a key treatment for managing Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM), is associated with increased LC risk. The impact of non-insulin antidiabetic drugs, particularly GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), on LC risk is not well understood. This study evaluated LC risk in T2DM patients, comparing seven non-insulin antidiabetic agents to insulin. Using the TriNetX Analytics platform, we analyzed the de-identified electronic health records of 1,040,341 T2DM patients treated between 2005 and 2019, excluding those with prior antidiabetic use or LC diagnoses. We calculated hazard ratios and confidence intervals for LC risk and used propensity score matching to control for confounding factors. All non-insulin antidiabetic drugs, except alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, were associated with significantly reduced LC risk compared to insulin, with GLP-1RAs showing the greatest reduction (HR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.41, 0.59). GLP-1RAs were consistently associated with lowered LC risk across all histological types, races, genders, and smoking statuses. These findings suggest that non-insulin antidiabetic drugs, particularly GLP-1RAs, may be preferable for managing T2DM while reducing LC risk.

Impaired Glucose Metabolism, Anti-Diabetes Medications, and Risk of Thyroid Cancer

Simple Summary

An epidemiologic link exists between obesity, insulin resistance, diabetes, and some cancers, such as breast cancer and colon cancer. The prevalence of obesity and diabetes is increasing, and additional epidemiologic data suggest that there may be a link between obesity and risk of thyroid abnormalities. Factors that may link obesity and diabetes with thyroid proliferative disorders include elevated circulating levels of insulin, increased body fat, high blood sugars, and exogenous insulin use. However, mechanisms underlying associations of obesity, diabetes, and thyroid proliferative disorders are not yet fully understood. The present manuscript reviews and summarizes current evidence of mechanisms and epidemiologic associations of obesity, insulin resistance, and use of anti-diabetes medications with benign and malignant proliferative disorders of the thyroid.

Abstract

The prevalence of obesity is progressively increasing along with the potential high risk for insulin resistance and development of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Obesity is associated with increased risk of many malignancies, and hyperinsulinemia has been proposed to be a link between obesity and cancer development. The incidence of thyroid cancer is also increasing, making this cancer the most common endocrine malignancy. There is some evidence of associations between obesity, insulin resistance and/or diabetes with thyroid proliferative disorders, including thyroid cancer. However, the etiology of such an association has not been fully elucidated. The goal of the present work is to review the current knowledge on crosstalk between thyroid and glucose metabolic pathways and the effects of obesity, insulin resistance, diabetes, and anti-hyperglycemic medications on the risk of thyroid cancer development.

The Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on the Second Primary Malignancies in Colorectal Cancer Patients

Introduction

All colorectal cancer (CRC) survivors have an increased risk of developing second primary malignancies (SPMs). The association between diabetes mellitus (DM) and the risk of cancer is well known. However, the role of DM and its therapy in the development of SPMs in CRC patients is not well described.

Methods

In this single-institutional retrospective analysis we identified 1,174 colorectal carcinoma patients, median follow-up 10.1 years, (median age 63 years, 724 men). All patients over 18 years with histologically confirmed CRC who were admitted in the period 1.1. 2003- 31.12.2013 and followed-up till 31.12. 2018 at the Masaryk Memorial Cancer Institute (MMCI) were screened for eligibility. The exclusion criteria were CRC diagnosed at autopsy, lost to follow-up and high risk of development of SPMs due to hereditary cancer syndrome. Tumours are considered multiple primary malignancies if arising in different sites and/or are of a different histology or morphology group. Comparisons of the basic characteristics between the patients with SPM and the patients without SPM were performed as well as comparison of the occurrence of SPMs by the site of diagnosis between the DM and non-DM cohorts and survival analyses.

Results

A SPM was diagnosed in 234 (20%) patients, DM in 183 (15%) patients. DM was diagnosed in 22.6% of those with SPM vs. in 13.8% of those without SPM (p=0.001). The most common types of SPMs in DM patients were other CRC, kidney, lung, bladder and nonmelanoma skin cancer, but only carcinoma of the liver and bile duct tracts was significantly more common than in the group without DM. Although breast cancer was the second most common in the group with DM, its incidence was lower than in the group without DM, as well as prostate cancer. A significantly higher incidence of SPMs was found in older CRC patients (≥ 65 years) and in those with lower stage colon cancer and DM. No significant difference in DM treatment between those with and without a SPM was observed including analysis of type of insulin.

Conclusion

CRC patients with diabetes mellitus, especially those with older age, and early stages of colon cancer, should be screened for second primary malignancies more often than the standard population. Patients without DM have longer survival. According to the occurrence of the most common second malignancies, a clinical examination, blood count, and ultrasound of the abdomen is appropriate, together with standard breast and colorectal cancer screening, and lung cancer screening under certain conditions, and should be recommended in CRC survivors especially in patients with intercurrent DM, however the necessary frequency of screening remains unclear.

(Ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues versus NPH insulin (human isophane insulin) for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Evidence that antihyperglycaemic therapy is beneficial for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus is conflicting. While the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) found tighter glycaemic control to be positive, other studies, such as the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial, found the effects of an intensive therapy to lower blood glucose to near normal levels to be more harmful than beneficial. Study results also showed different effects for different antihyperglycaemic drugs, regardless of the achieved blood glucose levels. In consequence, firm conclusions on the effect of interventions on patient-relevant outcomes cannot be drawn from the effect of these interventions on blood glucose concentration alone. In theory, the use of newer insulin analogues may result in fewer macrovascular and microvascular events.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects of long-term treatment with (ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues (insulin glargine U100 and U300, insulin detemir and insulin degludec) with NPH (neutral protamine Hagedorn) insulin (human isophane insulin) in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

SEARCH METHODS

For this Cochrane Review update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ICTRP Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. The date of the last search was 5 November 2019, except Embase which was last searched 26 January 2017. We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of treatment with (ultra-)long-acting insulin analogues to NPH in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias, extracted data and evaluated the overall certainty of the evidence using GRADE. Trials were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 24 RCTs. Of these, 16 trials compared insulin glargine to NPH insulin and eight trials compared insulin detemir to NPH insulin. In these trials, 3419 people with type 2 diabetes mellitus were randomised to insulin glargine and 1321 people to insulin detemir. The duration of the included trials ranged from 24 weeks to five years. For studies, comparing insulin glargine to NPH insulin, target values ranged from 4.0 mmol/L to 7.8 mmol/L (72 mg/dL to 140 mg/dL) for fasting blood glucose (FBG), from 4.4 mmol/L to 6.6 mmol/L (80 mg/dL to 120 mg/dL) for nocturnal blood glucose and less than 10 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) for postprandial blood glucose, when applicable. Blood glucose and glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) target values for studies comparing insulin detemir to NPH insulin ranged from 4.0 mmol/L to 7.0 mmol/L (72 mg/dL to 126 mg/dL) for FBG, less than 6.7 mmol/L (120 mg/dL) to less than 10 mmol/L (180 mg/dL) for postprandial blood glucose, 4.0 mmol/L to 7.0 mmol/L (72 mg/dL to 126 mg/dL) for nocturnal blood glucose and 5.8% to less than 6.4% HbA1c, when applicable. All trials had an unclear or high risk of bias for several risk of bias domains. Overall, insulin glargine and insulin detemir resulted in fewer participants experiencing hypoglycaemia when compared with NPH insulin. Changes in HbA1c were comparable for long-acting insulin analogues and NPH insulin. Insulin glargine compared to NPH insulin had a risk ratio (RR) for severe hypoglycaemia of 0.68 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.46 to 1.01; P = 0.06; absolute risk reduction (ARR) -1.2%, 95% CI -2.0 to 0; 14 trials, 6164 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The RR for serious hypoglycaemia was 0.75 (95% CI 0.52 to 1.09; P = 0.13; ARR -0.7%, 95% CI -1.3 to 0.2; 10 trials, 4685 participants; low-certainty evidence). Treatment with insulin glargine reduced the incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia and confirmed nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Treatment with insulin detemir compared to NPH insulin found an RR for severe hypoglycaemia of 0.45 (95% CI 0.17 to 1.20; P = 0.11; ARR -0.9%, 95% CI -1.4 to 0.4; 5 trials, 1804 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The Peto odds ratio for serious hypoglycaemia was 0.16, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.61; P = 0.007; ARR -0.9%, 95% CI -1.1 to -0.4; 5 trials, 1777 participants; low-certainty evidence). Treatment with detemir also reduced the incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia and confirmed nocturnal hypoglycaemia. Information on patient-relevant outcomes such as death from any cause, diabetes-related complications, health-related quality of life and socioeconomic effects was insufficient or lacking in almost all included trials. For those outcomes for which some data were available, there were no meaningful differences between treatment with glargine or detemir and treatment with NPH. There was no clear difference between insulin-analogues and NPH insulin in terms of weight gain. The incidence of adverse events was comparable for people treated with glargine or detemir, and people treated with NPH. We found no trials comparing ultra-long-acting insulin glargine U300 or insulin degludec with NPH insulin.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

While the effects on HbA1c were comparable, treatment with insulin glargine and insulin detemir resulted in fewer participants experiencing hypoglycaemia when compared with NPH insulin. Treatment with insulin detemir also reduced the incidence of serious hypoglycaemia. However, serious hypoglycaemic events were rare and the absolute risk reducing effect was low. Approximately one in 100 people treated with insulin detemir instead of NPH insulin benefited. In the studies, low blood glucose and HbA1c targets, corresponding to near normal or even non-diabetic blood glucose levels, were set. Therefore, results from the studies are only applicable to people in whom such low blood glucose concentrations are targeted. However, current guidelines recommend less-intensive blood glucose lowering for most people with type 2 diabetes in daily practice (e.g. people with cardiovascular diseases, a long history of type 2 diabetes, who are susceptible to hypoglycaemia or older people). Additionally, low-certainty evidence and trial designs that did not conform with current clinical practice meant it remains unclear if the same effects will be observed in daily clinical practice. Most trials did not report patient-relevant outcomes.

Is Insulin Therapy Safe?

BACKGROUND

After 98 years of insulin therapy, issues of safety remain of concern.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

Uncertainty has been expressed variously in regard of arterial cell wall proliferation, promotion of proliferative retinopathy, promotion of tumor growth, and for pregnancy. Immunological issues have been little studied since the advent of highly purified insulins in the 1970s. A specific topic is whether hypoglycemia, severe or otherwise, might promote cardiac thrombotic or dysrhythmic events.

DATA SOURCES

A literature review in these areas is difficult because nearly all clinical trials with insulin refer to adverse events. However, the specific topics aforementioned allow for some informed literature searching supplemented by finger-searching of published articles, notably in connection with the insulin analogues.

THERAPEUTIC UNDERSTANDINGS

Safety data for pregnancy are weak because of power problems, but there are no signals for added maternal or fetal risk. Clinical-outcome trials that assess insulin against other glucose-lowering therapies or with significantly different insulin preparations in different arms are few and are sometimes conducted at modest dosage but fail to suggest promotion of arterial disease. Concern over growth-promoting activity of insulin glargine turned out to be ill-founded when the circulating moiety after injection was noted to have a lower IGF-1:insulin activity than human insulin, and a direct study of retinopathy progression or meta-analysis of malignancy incidence failed to show signals of concern. It does seem that severe hypoglycemia can cause death in some people with type 1 diabetes, although the tissue mechanism is unknown, but reducing severe hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes does not protect against arterial events. Both symptomatic and severe hypoglycemia can however be reduced by use of more recently marketed insulin analogues, and this improves tolerability if not safety.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, although insulin therapy clearly gives health benefits, the evidence for long-term harm is absent or weak.

Development and Validation of an Image Analysis System for the Measurement of Cell Proliferation in Mammary Glands of Rats

Reliable detection and measurement of cell proliferation are essential in the preclinical assessment of carcinogenic risk of therapeutics. In this context, the assessment of mitogenic potential on mammary glands is crucial in the preclinical safety evaluation of novel insulins. The existing manual counting is time-consuming and subject to operator bias. To standardize the processes, make it faster, and resistant to errors, we developed a semiautomated image analysis system (CEPA software, which is open-source) for counting of proliferating cells in photomicrographs of mammary gland sections of rats labeled with Ki-67. We validated the software and met the predefined targets for specificity, accuracy, and reproducibility. In comparison to manual counting, the respective mean differences in absolute labeling indices (LIs) for CEPA software were 3.12% for user 1 and 3.05% for user 2. The respective regression analysis revealed a good correlation between the CEPA software user and manual counting. Moreover, the CEPA software showed enhanced reproducibility between independent users. The interuser variability is centered around 0 and the absolute difference was about 0.53% LI. Based on validation data, our software has superiority to the manual counting and is a valid and reliable tool for the routine analysis of cell proliferation in mammary glands from rats exposed to insulin analogs.

Long-term exposure to insulin and volumetric mammographic density: observational and genetic associations in the Karma study

BACKGROUND

Long-term insulin exposure has been implicated in breast cancer etiology, but epidemiological evidence remains inconclusive. The aims of this study were to investigate the association of insulin therapy with mammographic density (MD) as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer and to assess associations with long-term elevated circulating insulin levels using a genetic score comprising 18 insulin-associated variants.

METHODS

We used data from the KARolinska MAmmography (Karma) project, a Swedish mammography screening cohort. Insulin-treated patients with type 1 (T1D, n = 122) and type 2 (T2D, n = 237) diabetes were identified through linkage with the Prescribed Drug Register and age-matched to 1771 women without diabetes. We assessed associations with treatment duration and insulin glargine use, and we further examined MD differences using non-insulin-treated T2D patients as an active comparator. MD was measured using a fully automated volumetric method, and analyses were adjusted for multiple potential confounders. Associations with the insulin genetic score were assessed in 9437 study participants without diabetes.

RESULTS

Compared with age-matched women without diabetes, insulin-treated T1D patients had greater percent dense (8.7% vs. 11.4%) and absolute dense volumes (59.7 vs. 64.7 cm³), and a smaller absolute nondense volume (615 vs. 491 cm³). Similar associations were observed for insulin-treated T2D, and estimates were not materially different in analyses comparing insulin-treated T2D patients with T2D patients receiving noninsulin glucose-lowering medication. In both T1D and T2D, the magnitude of the association with the absolute dense volume was highest for long-term insulin therapy (≥ 5 years) and the long-acting insulin analog glargine. No consistent evidence of differential associations by insulin treatment duration or type was found for percent dense and absolute nondense volumes. Genetically predicted insulin levels were positively associated with percent dense and absolute dense volumes, but not with the absolute nondense volume (percentage difference [95% CI] per 1-SD increase in insulin genetic score = 0.8 [0.0; 1.6], 0.9 [0.1; 1.8], and 0.1 [- 0.8; 0.9], respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The consistency in direction of association for insulin treatment and the insulin genetic score with the absolute dense volume suggest a causal influence of long-term increased insulin exposure on mammographic dense breast tissue.

Pharmacotherapy of type 2 diabetes: An update

Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide and a major economic burden. The prevalence of T2DM is rising, suggesting more effective prevention and treatment strategies are necessary. The aim of this narrative review is to summarize the pharmacologic treatment options available for patients with T2DM. Each therapeutic class is presented in detail, outlining medication effects, side effects, glycemic control, effect on weight, indications and contraindications, and use in selected populations (heart failure, renal insufficiency, obesity and the elderly). We also present representative cost for each antidiabetic category. Then, we provide an individualized guide for initiation and intensification of treatment and discuss the considerations and rationale for an individualized glycemic goal.

Regulatory Forum Opinion Piece: Review-Toxicological Pathology Profile and Regulatory Expectations for Nonclinical Development of Insulins and Insulin Analogues

The toxicological profile of insulins is exclusively due to exaggerated pharmacology resulting in hypoglycemic findings. Insulin analogues displaying modifications and aimed at improving pharmacokinetics do not induce different toxicity. The main target is the brain displaying neuronal necrosis. Wallerian degeneration of nerves occurs rarely after severe hypoglycemia. These findings are of potential human relevance; nevertheless, these changes are induced in normoglycemic animals whereas diabetic patients suffer from hyperglycemia. Therefore, it is usually not difficult to achieve a therapeutic window for subsequent use in patients. Based upon this and in the absence of classical toxicity, there has been no scientific need for diabetic animal models. A greater challenge is the mitogenicity already inherent with regular insulin. Thus, the focus for preclinical safety evaluation of analogues is to demonstrate that modifications in regular insulin do not result in enhanced mitogenicity. The approaches used to assess the mitogenic potential of insulin analogues have changed over time driven by scientific progression and changes within the regulatory environment. Therefore, in vitro and in vivo evaluation of cell proliferation has become common practice, and to date there has been no evidence that the mitogenic potential of insulin analogues may be increased compared to regular insulin.

Insulin glargine use and breast cancer risk: Associations with cumulative exposure

BACKGROUND

This study was aimed to assess the risk of breast cancer associated with exposure to insulin glargine in women with type 2 diabetes and evaluate whether the pattern of risk concurs with the hypothesized trend of an increase in risk with longer duration of use, taking into account previous cumulative exposure to other types of insulin.

METHODS

We performed a restrospective cohort study (2002-2013) in the Clinical Practice Research Datalink among adult female patients with a first ever insulin prescription (n = 12 468). Time-dependent exposure measures were used to assess associations with duration of use of: (1) other insulin types before glargine was first prescribed (i.e. among switchers); and (2) of glargine during follow-up. Analyses were performed separately for insulin-naïve glargine users and patients switched to glargine. Cox proportional hazards models were used to derive p-trends, hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for breast cancer associated with glargine use.

RESULTS

During 66 151 person years, 186 breast cancer cases occurred; 76 in glargine users (3.0/1000 years) and 110 in users of other insulins (2.7/1000 years). Among insulin-naïve women, no association with cumulative glargine use was observed (p-trend = 0.91), even after ≥5 years (HR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.48-2.33). Among switchers, a linear trend with years of prior exposure to other insulins was found (p-trend = 0.02). An increased risk was observed in glargine users with extensive (>3 years) past exposure to other insulins (HR = 3.17, 95% CI 1.28-7.84). A non-significant trend with cumulative glargine exposure was found among switchers (p-trend = 0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Exposure to glargine was not associated with an increased breast cancer risk in insulin-naïve patients. Exposure to other insulins prior to the start of glargine appears to be relevant when studying breast cancer risk associated with glargine use.

Looking at the carcinogenicity of human insulin analogues via the intrinsic disorder prism

Therapeutic insulin, in its native and biosynthetic forms as well as several currently available insulin analogues, continues to be the protein of most interest to researchers. From the time of its discovery to the development of modern insulin analogues, this important therapeutic protein has passed through several stages and product generations. Beside the well-known link between diabetes and cancer risk, the currently used therapeutic insulin analogues raised serious concerns due to their potential roles in cancer initiation and/or progression. It is possible that structural variations in some of the insulin analogues are responsible for the appearance of new oncogenic species with high binding affinity to the insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1) receptor. The question we are trying to answer in this work is: are there any specific features of the distribution of intrinsic disorder propensity within the amino acid sequences of insulin analogues that may provide an explanation for the carcinogenicity of the altered insulin protein?

Effect of Long-Acting Insulin Analogs on the Risk of Cancer: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies

OBJECTIVE

Observational studies examining the association between long-acting insulin analogs and cancer incidence have produced inconsistent results. We conducted a systematic review of these studies, focusing on their methodological strengths and weaknesses.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE from 2000 to 2014 to identify all observational studies evaluating the relationship between the long-acting insulin analogs and the risk of any and site-specific cancers (breast, colorectal, prostate). We included cohort and case-control studies published in English on insulin glargine and detemir and any cancer incidence among patients with type 1 or 2 diabetes. The methodological assessment involved the inclusion of prevalent users, inclusion of lag periods, time-related biases, and duration of follow-up between insulin initiation and cancer incidence.

RESULTS

A total of 16 cohort and 3 case-control studies met our inclusion criteria. All studies evaluated insulin glargine, and four studies also examined insulin detemir. Follow-up ranged from 0.9 to 7.0 years. Thirteen of 15 studies reported no association between insulin glargine and detemir and any cancer. Four of 13 studies reported an increased risk of breast cancer with insulin glargine. In the quality assessment, 7 studies included prevalent users, 11 did not consider a lag period, 6 had time-related biases, and 16 had short (<5 years) follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The observational studies examining the risk of cancer associated with long-acting insulin analogs have important methodological shortcomings that limit the conclusions that can be drawn. Thus, uncertainty remains, particularly for breast cancer risk.

Block versus Random Amphiphilic Glycopolymer Nanopaticles as Glucose-Responsive Vehicles

To explore the effect of polymer structure on their self-assembled aggregates and their unique characteristics, this study was devoted to developing a series of amphiphilic block and random phenylboronic acid-based glycopolymers by RAFT polymerization. The amphiphilic glycopolymers were successfully self-assembled into spherically shaped nanoparticles with narrow size distribution in aqueous solution. For block and random copolymers with similar monomer compositions, block copolymer nanoparticles exhibited a more regular transmittance change with the increasing glucose level, while a more evident variation of size and quicker decreasing tendency in I/I0 behavior in different glucose media were observed for random copolymer nanoparticles. Cell viability of all the polymer nanoparticles investigated by MTT assay was higher than 80%, indicating that both block and random copolymers had good cytocompatibility. Insulin could be encapsulated into both nanoparticles, and insulin release rate for random glycopolymer was slightly quicker than that for the block ones. We speculate that different chain conformations between block and random glycopolymers play an important role in self-assembled nanoaggregates and underlying glucose-sensitive behavior.

Treatment with insulin (analogues) and breast cancer risk in diabetics; a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro, animal and human evidence

INTRODUCTION

Several studies have suggested that anti-diabetic insulin analogue treatment might increase cancer risk. The aim of this study was to review the postulated association between insulin and insulin analogue treatment and breast cancer development, and plausible mechanisms.

METHOD

A systematic literature search was performed on breast cell-line, animal and human studies using the key words 'insulin analogue' and 'breast neoplasia' in MEDLINE at PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases. A quantitative and qualitative review was performed on the epidemiological data; due to a limited number of reported estimates, a meta-analysis was performed for glargine only. A comprehensive overview was composed for in vitro and animal studies. Protein and gene expression was analysed for the cell lines most frequently used in the included in vitro studies.

RESULTS

In total 16 in vitro, 5 animal, 2 in vivo human and 29 epidemiological papers were included. Insulin AspB10 showed mitogenic properties in vitro and in animal studies. Glargine was the only clinically available insulin analogue for which an increased proliferative potential was found in breast cancer cell lines. However, the pooled analysis of 13 epidemiological studies did not show evidence for an association between insulin glargine treatment and an increased breast cancer risk (HR 1.04; 95 % CI 0.91-1.17; p=0.49) versus no glargine in patients with diabetes mellitus. It has to be taken into account that the number of animal studies was limited, and epidemiological studies were underpowered and suffered from methodological limitations.

CONCLUSION

There is no compelling evidence that any clinically available insulin analogue (Aspart, Determir, Glargine, Glulisine or Lispro), nor human insulin increases breast cancer risk. Overall, the data suggests that insulin treatment is not involved in breast tumour initiation, but might induce breast tumour progression by up regulating mitogenic signalling pathways.

Impaired glucose metabolism treatment and carcinogenesis

Carbohydrate metabolism disorders increase the risk of carcinogenesis. Diabetes mellitus alters numerous physiological processes that may encourage cancer growth. However, treating impaired glucose homeostasis may actually promote neoplasia; maintaining proper glucose plasma concentrations reduces metabolic stresses, however, certain medications may themselves result in oncogenic effects. A number of previous studies have demonstrated that metformin reduces the cancer risk. However, the use of sulfonylurea derivatives correlates with an increased risk of developing a malignancy. Another form of treatment, insulin therapy, involves using various forms of insulin that differ in pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics and efficacy. Previous studies have indicated that certain insulin variants also affect the cancer risk. The results from analyses that address the safety of long-lasting insulin types raise the most concern regarding the increased risk of malignancy. Rapid development of novel diabetic medications and their widespread use carries the risk of potentially increased rates of cancer, unnoticeable in limited, randomized, controlled trials. In the present review, the results of clinical and epidemiological studies are evaluated to assess the safety of anti-hyperglycemic medications and their effect on cancer risk and outcomes.

Long-term insulin glargine therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a focus on cardiovascular outcomes

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Hyperinsulinemia is associated with increased cardiovascular risk, but the effects of exogenous insulin on cardiovascular disease progression have been less well studied. Insulin has been shown to have both cardioprotective and atherosclerosis-promoting effects in laboratory animal studies. Long-term clinical trials using insulin to attain improved diabetes control in younger type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients have shown improved cardiovascular outcomes. Shorter trials of intensive diabetes control with high insulin use in higher risk patients with type 2 diabetes have shown either no cardiovascular benefit or increased all cause and cardiovascular mortality. Glargine insulin is a basal insulin analog widely used to treat patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. This review focuses on the effects of glargine on cardiovascular outcomes. Glargine lowers triglycerides, leads to a modest weight gain, causes less hypoglycemia when compared with intermediate-acting insulin, and has a neutral effect on blood pressure. The Outcome Reduction With Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN trial), a 6.2 year dedicated cardiovascular outcomes trial of glargine demonstrated no increased cardiovascular risk.

Diabetes and cancer: epidemiology and potential mechanisms

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is an independent risk factor for cancer such as pancreatic, liver, colorectal and breast cancer. In addition, diabetes decreases the risk of prostate cancer. These associations have been found in numerous epidemiological studies, among them several prospective cohorts. However, such studies do not prove causality of the association and cannot exclude inadequate correction for known confounders (e.g. visceral fat) or the influence of unknown confounders. Thus, it is unclear whether the cancer risk is increased by the causes (e.g. the metabolic syndrome), the metabolic consequences (e.g. hyperglycaemia) or the therapy of diabetes; a question which is of major importance for therapeutic guidelines. Identification of the potential mechanisms by which the diabetes or its therapy accelerates or inhibits the development of cancer will help answering the question by providing biological plausibility. This review will summarize the evidence supporting the association of cancer and type 2 diabetes and discuss its potential causes.

Antihyperglycaemic therapies and cancer risk

AIMS

This review is aimed at highlighting the potential mitogenic/tumour growth-promoting or antimitogenic/tumour growth-inhibiting effects of the main antihyperglycaemic drug classes.

METHODS

We review and discuss the most current studies evaluating the association between antidiabetic medications used in clinical practice and malignancies as described so far.

RESULTS

Metformin seems to be the only antidiabetic drug to exert protective effects both on monotherapy and also when combined with other oral antidiabetic drugs or insulins in several site-specific cancers. In contrast, several other drug classes may increase cancer risk. Some reason for concern remains regarding sulphonylureas and also the incretin-based therapies regarding pancreas and thyroid cancers and the sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors as well as pioglitazone regarding bladder cancer. The majority of meta-analyses suggest that there is no evidence for a causal relationship between insulin glargine and elevated cancer risk, although the studies have been controversially discussed. For α-glucosidase inhibitors and glinides, neutral or only few data upon cancer risk exist.

CONCLUSION

Although the molecular mechanisms are not fully understood, a potential risk of mitogenicity and tumour growth promotion cannot be excluded in case of several antidiabetic drug classes. However, more large-scale, randomized, well-designed clinical studies with especially long follow-up time periods are needed to get reliable answers to these safety issues.

Electronic medical record cancer incidence over six years comparing new users of glargine with new users of NPH insulin

Background

Recent studies suggested that insulin glargine use could be associated with increased risk of cancer. We compared the incidence of cancer in new users of glargine versus new users of NPH in a longitudinal clinical cohort with diabetes for up to 6 years.

Methods and Findings

From all patients who had been regularly followed at Massachusetts General Hospital from 1/01/2005 to 12/31/2010, 3,680 patients who had a medication record for glargine or NPH usage were obtained from the electronic medical record (EMR). From those we selected 539 new glargine users (age: 60.1±13.6 years, BMI: 32.7±7.5 kg/m²) and 343 new NPH users (61.5±14.1 years, 32.7±8.3 kg/m²) who had no prevalent cancer during 19 months prior to glargine or NPH initiation. All incident cancer cases were ascertained from the EMR requiring at least 2 ICD-9 codes within a 2 month period. Insulin exposure time and cumulative dose were validated. The statistical analysis compared the rates of cancer in new glargine vs. new NPH users while on treatment, adjusted for the propensity to receive one or the other insulin. There were 26 and 28 new cancer cases in new glargine and new NPH users for 1559 and 1126 person-years follow-up, respectively. There were no differences in the propensity-adjusted clinical characteristics between groups. The adjusted hazard ratio for the cancer incidence comparing glargine vs. NPH use was 0.65 (95% CI: 0.36–1.19).

Conclusions

Insulin glargine is not associated with development of cancers when compared with NPH in this longitudinal and carefully retrieved EMR data.

Diabetes mellitus: influences on cancer risk

Diabetes mellitus and cancer are common conditions, and their co-diagnosis in the same individual is not infrequent. The relative risks associated with type 2 diabetes are greater than twofold for hepatic, pancreatic, and endometrial cancers. The relative risk is somewhat lower, at 1.2-1.5-fold for colorectal, breast, and bladder cancers. In comparison, the relative risk of lung cancer is less than 1. The evidence for other malignancies (e.g. kidney, non-Hodgkin lymphoma) is inconclusive, whereas prostatic cancer occurs less frequently in male patients with diabetes. The potential biologic links between the two diseases are incompletely understood. Evidence from observational studies suggests that some medications used to treat hyperglycemia are associated with either increased or reduced risk of cancer. Whereas anti-diabetic drugs have a minor influence on cancer risk, drugs used to treat cancer may either cause diabetes or worsen pre-existing diabetes. If hyperinsulinemia acts as a critical link between the observed increased cancer risk and type 2 diabetes, one would predict that patients with type 1 diabetes would have a different cancer risk pattern than patients with type 2 diabetes because the former patients are exposed to lower levels of exogenous administered insulin. Obtained results showed that patients with type 1 diabetes had elevated risks of cancers of the stomach, cervix, and endometrium. Type 1 diabetes is associated with a modest excess cancer risk overall and risks of specific cancers that differ from those associated with type 2 diabetes.

Reduced risk of hypoglycemia with once-daily glargine versus twice-daily NPH and number needed to harm with NPH to demonstrate the risk of one additional hypoglycemic event in type 2 diabetes: Evidence from a long-term controlled trial

AIMS

This analysis evaluated HbA1c-adjusted hypoglycemia risk with glargine versus neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) over a 5-year study in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Clinical significance was assessed using number needed to harm (NNH) to demonstrate the risk of one additional patient experiencing at least one hypoglycemic event.

METHODS

Individual patient-level data for symptomatic documented hypoglycemia and HbA1c values from a 5-year randomized study comparing once-daily glargine (n=513) with twice-daily NPH (n=504) were analyzed. Symptomatic hypoglycemia was categorized according to concurrent self-monitoring blood glucose levels and need for assistance. Hypoglycemic events per patient-year as a function of HbA1c were fitted by negative binomial regression using treatment and HbA1c at endpoint as independent variables. An estimate of NNH was derived from logistic regression models.

RESULTS

The cumulative number of symptomatic hypoglycemia events was consistently lower with glargine compared with NPH over 5years. Compared with twice-daily NPH, once-daily glargine treatment resulted in significantly lower adjusted odds ratios (OR) for all daytime hypoglycemia (OR 0.74; p=0.030) and any severe event (OR 0.64; p=0.035), representing a 26% and 36% reduction in the odds of daytime and severe hypoglycemia, respectively. Our model predicts that, if 25 patients were treated with NPH instead of glargine, then one additional patient would experience at least one severe hypoglycemic event.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis of long-term insulin treatment confirms findings from short-term studies and demonstrates that glargine provides sustained, clinically meaningful reductions in risk of hypoglycemia compared with NPH in patients with T2DM.

Use of insulin and insulin analogs and risk of cancer - systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Background:

An association of insulin use and risk of cancer has been reported but evidence is conflicting and methodological issues have been identified.

Objective:

To summarize results regarding insulin use and cancer risk by a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort and case-control studies examining risk of cancer associated with insulin use in patients with diabetes.

Data Sources:

Systematic literature search in 5 databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane Library.

Study Eligibility Criteria (PICOS):

Population: diabetes patients. Exposure: Users of any exogenous insulin. Comparison: Diabetes patients with or without use of antidiabetic drugs. Outcome: Any incident cancer. Study Design: Cohort and case-control studies.

Results:

42 eligible studies examined risk of any cancer and 27 site-specific cancers. Results of individual studies were heterogeneous. Meta-analyses were significant for: Insulin vs No Insulin: Increased risk for pancreas, liver, kidney, stomach and respiratory cancer, decreased risk for prostate cancer. Insulin vs Non-Insulin Antidiabetics: Increased risk for any, pancreatic and colorectal cancer. Glargine vs Non-Glargine Insulin: Increased risk for breast cancer, decreased risk for colon cancer.

Limitations:

Few studies available for most cancer sites and exposure contrasts, and few assess effect of dose and duration of exposure. Methodological issues in several studies. Availability of confounders.

Conclusions:

Insulin use was associated with risk of cancer at several sites. Cautious interpretation of results is warranted as methodological issues and limitations in several of the included studies have been identified. Choice of study design may have a profound effect on estimated cancer risk.

Importance of Beta Cell Function for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes

Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is characterized by insulin resistance and beta cell dysfunction. Recent evidence has emerged that beta cell dysfunction is a common pathogenetic feature of both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and T2DM never develops without beta cell dysfunction. Therefore, treatment of T2DM should aim to restore beta cell function. Although the treatment of T2DM has greatly improved over the past few decades, remaining issues in the current treatment of T2DM include (1) hypoglycemia; (2) body weight gain; (3) peripheral hyperinsulinemia and (4) postprandial hyperglycemia, which are all associated with inappropriate insulin supplementation, again underpinning the important role of endogenous and physiological insulin secretion in the management of T2DM. This review summarizes the current knowledge on beta cell function in T2DM and discusses the treatment strategy for T2DM in relation to beta cell dysfunction.

Latest insights into the risk of cancer in diabetes

A growing body of evidence from observational studies and meta‐analyses of the data suggest that diabetes mellitus is associated with an increased risk of cancer. Meta‐analyses have shown that diabetes increases the risks of total cancer, and of site‐specific cancers of the breast, endometrium, bladder, liver, colorectum and pancreas, and that it decreases the risk of prostate cancer. Insulin resistance and secondary hyperinsulinemia is the most frequently proposed hypothesis, and hyperglycemia itself might promote carcinogenesis. In addition to several facets of lifestyle including obesity, smoking and lack of exercise, treatment for diabetes might affect the risk of cancer. For instance, metformin, an insulin sensitizer, reportedly has a potential anticancer effect. In light of the exploding global epidemic of diabetes, even a modest increase in the cancer risk will translate into a substantial socioeconomic burden. The current insights underscore the need for clinical attention and better‐designed studies of the complex interactions between diabetes and cancer.

Cancer specific mortality in insulin-treated type 2 diabetes patients

Aims

To test the hypothesis that cumulative exposure to insulin and long-acting insulin analogs might be associated with cancer mortality in diabetes patients.

Methods

All consecutive diabetes patients aged over 40 years, residing in a major urban area were screened at their first diabetes outpatient visit between 01/01/2001-12/31/2008 (n = 79869). Exclusion criteria were insulin treatment at screening, no insulin treatment until 12/31/2008, less than 6 months of glucose-lowering treatment alone before insulin initiation, insulin prescription before glargine became available, age <40/≥80 years at first insulin prescription, and <6 months of insulin exposure. A total 4990 subjects were followed-up for death based on death certificate, until 12/31/2011. Adjusted time-dependent competing risk regression analysis, with daily updates of treatment modalities was performed. Results are expressed for every 10,000 IU of cumulative dose or one year of cumulative time exposure to insulin.

Results

Mean baseline age was 62±9 years, and follow-up 4.7±1.9 years. Glargine cumulative dose was associated with lower cancer mortality risk (subhazard ratio, SHR: 0.94 (95%CI 0.89–0.99, p = 0.033)). Cumulative exposure limited to that attained one year prior to death revealed lower SHRs for cumulative time (0.94 (95%CI 0.89–0.99, p = 0.018)) and cumulative dose of glargine (0.92 (95%CI 0.86–0.98, p = 0.014)). Glargine cumulative time and cumulative dose were significant predictors for lower pancreatic and breast cancer mortality, but not for deaths from lung, colorectal, female genital, liver, and urinary tract cancer. No increased hazards were found for any other subtypes of insulins.

Conclusions

The cumulative dose exposure to insulin glargine was associated with a lower risk of cancer mortality in general, and of breast and pancreatic cancer in particular. This effect remained even after additional “fixed” cohort or propensity score analyses.

Diabetes and cancer: two diseases with obesity as a common risk factor

There is a growing body of evidence to support a connection between diabetes (predominantly type 2), obesity and cancer. Multiple meta-analyses of epidemiological data show that people with diabetes are at increased risk of developing many different types of cancers, along with an increased risk of cancer mortality. Several pathophysiological mechanisms for this relationship have been postulated, including insulin resistance and hyperinsulinaemia, enhanced inflammatory processes, dysregulation of sex hormone production and hyperglycaemia. In addition to these potential mechanisms, a number of common risk factors, including obesity, may be behind the association between diabetes and cancer. Indeed, obesity is associated with an increased risk of cancer and diabetes. Abdominal adiposity has been shown to play a role in creating a systemic pro-inflammatory environment, which could result in the development of both diabetes and cancer. Here, we examine the relationship between diabetes, obesity and cancer, and investigate the potential underlying causes of increased cancer risk in individuals with diabetes. Current treatment recommendations for reducing the overall disease burden are also explored and possible areas for future research are considered.

India suspends pioglitazone: is it justified?

In the month of June 2013 the Government of India suddenly suspended three drugs for use. The suspension of the anti-diabetic agent came as a rude shock to the medical community who has been utilizing this insulin sensitizer for more than a decade. We took a close look at the controversies surrounding this agent, the current state in the global scenario and how India has reacted in this mini review. Like most of the drugs utilized in the management of medical disorders pioglitazone also has been under the scanner for quite some time. However no definitive cause and effect association with any of the adverse events namely bladder cancer, anemia, fractures and heart failure was found. The international community responded with caution and refrained from banning the drug outright except for France. The ban in India in the absence of incriminating data on the Indian population seems out of place.

The association of basal insulin glargine and/or n-3 fatty acids with incident cancers in patients with dysglycemia

OBJECTIVE Epidemiologic studies linking insulin glargine and glucose-lowering therapies to cancers and n-3 fatty acids to cancer prevention have not been confirmed. We aimed to assess the effect of insulin glargine and n-3 fatty acids on incident cancers within the context of the ORIGIN (Outcome Reduction with Initial Glargine Intervention) trial. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The ORIGIN trial is an international, long-term, randomized two-by-two factorial study comparing insulin glargine with standard care and n-3 fatty acids with placebo (double blind) in people with dysglycemia at high risk for cardiovascular events. The primary outcome measure (cancer substudy) was the occurrence of any new or recurrent adjudicated cancer. Cancer mortality and cancer subtypes were also analyzed. RESULTS Among 12,537 people (mean age 63.5 years, SD 7.8; 4,388 females), 953 developed a cancer event during the median follow-up of 6.2 years. In the glargine and standard care groups, the incidence of cancers was 1.32 and 1.32 per 100 person-years, respectively (P = 0.97), and in the n-3 fatty acid and placebo groups, it was 1.28 and 1.36 per 100 person-years, respectively (P = 0.39). No difference in the effect of either intervention was noted within predefined subgroups (P for all interactions ≥0.17). Cancer-related mortality and cancer-specific outcomes also did not differ between groups. Postrandomization HbA1c levels, glucose-lowering therapies (including metformin), and BMI did not affect cancer outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Insulin glargine and n-3 fatty acids have a neutral association with overall and cancer-specific outcomes, including cancer-specific mortality. Exposure to glucose-lowering therapies, including metformin, and HbA1c level during the study did not alter cancer risk.

Diabetes and cancer relationships

Diabetes and cancer are both heterogeneous and multifactorial diseases with tremendous impact on health worldwide. Epidemiologic evidence suggests that certain malignancies may be associated with diabetes, as well as with diabetes risk factors and, perhaps, with certain diabetes treatments. Numerous biological mechanisms could account for these relationships. Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1, IGF-2, IGF-1 receptors, insulin, and the insulin receptor play roles in the development and progression of cancers. Although evidence from randomized controlled trials does not support or refute associations of diabetes and its treatments with either increased or reduced risk of cancer incidence or prognosis, consideration of malignancy incidence rates and the magnitude of the trials that would be required to address these issues explains why such studies may not be readily undertaken.

Cancer incidence among those initiating insulin therapy with glargine versus human NPH insulin

OBJECTIVE

To add to the evidence on comparative long-term effects of insulin analog glargine versus human NPH insulin on the risk for cancer.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We identified cohorts of initiators of glargine and human NPH without an insulin prescription during the prior 19 months among patients covered by the Inovalon Medical Outcomes Research for Effectiveness and Economics Registry (MORE2 Registry) between January 2003 and December 2010. Patients were required to have a second prescription of the same insulin within 180 days and to be free of cancer. We balanced cohorts on risk factors for cancer outcomes based on comorbidities, comedication, and health care use during the prior 12 months using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Incident cancer was defined as having two claims for cancer (any cancer) or the same cancer (breast, prostate, colon) within 2 months. We estimated adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and their 95% CI using weighted Cox models censoring for stopping, switching, or augmenting insulin treatment, end of enrollment, and mortality.

RESULTS

More patients initiated glargine (43,306) than NPH (9,147). Initiators of glargine (NPH) were followed for 1.2 (1.1) years and 50,548 (10,011) person-years; 993 (178) developed cancer. The overall HR was 1.12 (95% CI 0.95-1.32). Results were consistent for breast cancer, prostate cancer, and colon cancer; various durations of treatment; and sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients initiating insulin glargine rather than NPH do not seem to be at an increased risk for cancer. While our study contributes significantly to our evidence base for long-term effects, this evidence is very limited mainly based on actual dynamics in insulin prescribing.

Diabetes, antihyperglycemic medications and cancer risk: smoke or fire?

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this review article is to discuss the epidemiological links between diabetes and cancer; the potential biological mechanisms linking diabetes, obesity and cancer; the risk of cancer associated with antidiabetic medications.

METHODS

The data discussed in this review were obtained from the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists Consensus Conference on Diabetes and Cancer, held in New York, NY, USA, September 2012.

RESULTS

The results of these studies demonstrate a significant association between diabetes and the risk of multiple cancers, including hepatocellular, pancreatic, endometrial, colorectal, breast, kidney, bladder, gastric, and ovarian cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, T cell lymphoma and leukemia. There are multiple potential biological mechanisms that may link type 2 diabetes, obesity and cancer. Insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia may lead to direct activation of the insulin receptors on tumor cells and promote tumor growth. Other potential mechanisms include increased circulating, local or bioavailable insulin-like growth factor 1, hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, increased circulating or local estrogen, adipokines and direct and indirect effects of inflammatory cytokines. Epidemiological studies have had conflicting results regarding the associations between various classes of antidiabetic medication and cancer development. Animal studies have demonstrated increased tumor growth with certain medications, but their relevance to humans is uncertain. Metformin may, however, have protective effects on cancer development and may improve survival in patients with cancer.

CONCLUSION

We describe the current understanding of the links among diabetes, antidiabetic medication and cancer risk. We highlight some of the issues that should be addressed in the future to prevent cancer development and death in those with diabetes.

Advances in pharmacologic therapies for type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a multi-causal, heterogeneous and progressive cardiometabolic condition, with an increasing prevalence worldwide. T2DM is associated with multiple comorbidities that may impact patients' quality of life. Treatment is multifactorial, but pharmacologic treatment of hyperglycemia is still regarded as the mainstay of diabetes management. Current established therapies include metformin, sulfonylurea agents and insulin, the long-term use of which was associated with reduced micro- and macrovascular events in the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study. Despite major recent advances in diabetes care, a large proportion of patients remain in poor glycemic control, necessitating the development of new therapeutic options. The recently published position statement of the American Diabetes Association and European Association for the Study of Diabetes for the management of hyperglycemia in T2DM has accommodated this wider range of therapy choices, as it is less prescriptive and advocates an individualized treatment approach, taking into account many relevant patient- and disease-related factors. This review summarizes the updates on various established agents as well as the recent developments with regard to incretin-based therapies, inhibitors of the renal tubular sodium-glucose-linked-transporter-2 and ultra-long acting basal insulin formulations.

Cancer with diabetes: prevalence, metabolic control, and survival in an academic oncology practice

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence of diabetes mellitus, glycemic control, and impact of diabetes on overall survival in an academic oncology practice.

METHODS

Data on cancer patients (1999 to 2008) were retrieved from the institutional cancer registry and linked to electronic files to obtain diabetes status and hemoglobin A1c (A1C) values within the first 6 months of cancer diagnosis. Overall survival by cancer type with and without diabetes was compared using Cox regression.

RESULTS

Excluding skin and hematologic malignancies, 15,951 cancer cases were identified. Overall diabetes prevalence was 6.8% (n = 1,090), declining over time (P<0.001). Diabetes was common among patients with pancreatic (9.8% [61 of 624]), colorectal (7.7% [89 of 1,151]), or bladder cancers (7.6% [68 of 899]). Patients with diabetes were older (mean age, 70 versus 66 years; P<0.001) and more likely to be male (66.3% [723 of 1,090] versus 60.2% [8,949 of 14,858]; P<0.001). The mean A1C among diabetic cancer patients was 6.8% and did not differ across cancer types (P = 0.80). Only 58.6% (331 of 565) of diabetic cancer patients had all A1C <7.0% during the first 6 months following cancer diagnosis. Pancreatic cancer patients with coexisting diabetes had better overall survival than pancreatic cancer patients without diabetes (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval 0.44 to 0.80; P<0.001). Conversely, diabetic prostate cancer patients had worse overall survival than prostate cancer patients without diabetes (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.76; P = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

In this academic oncology practice, diabetes was common, glycemic control often was suboptimal, and survival varied by cancer type. Additional study is needed to optimize glucose management and investigate mechanisms underlying age, sex, and survival differences.

Diabetes and pancreatic cancer

The relationship between diabetes and pancreatic cancer is complex. Diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance is present in more than 2/3rd of pancreatic cancer patients. Epidemiological studies have consistently shown a modest increase in the risk of pancreatic cancer in type 2 diabetes, with an inverse relationship to duration of disease. Additionally, recent studies suggest that anti-diabetic medications may modulate the risk of pancreatic cancer in type 2 diabetes. Subjects >50 years of age with new onset diabetes are at higher risk of having pancreatic cancer. However, to screen new-onset diabetes for pancreatic cancer, additional markers are needed that can distinguish pancreatic cancer-associated diabetes from type 2 diabetes.

The metabolic and mitogenic properties of basal insulin analogues

CONTEXT

Retrospective, observational studies have reported an association between diabetes treatment with insulin and a higher incidence of cancer.

OBJECTIVE

Overview the literature for in vitro and in vivo studies of the metabolic and mitogenic properties of basal insulin analogues and assess the implications for clinical use.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified through PubMed and congress abstract database searches; data on metabolic and mitogenic signalling in relation to insulin treatment of diabetes are included in this review.

RESULTS

The balance of evidence shows that although some analogues have demonstrated mitogenic potency in some in vitro studies in cancer cell lines, these findings do not translate to the in vivo setting in animals or to the clinical setting in humans.

CONCLUSIONS

The current consensus is that there is no clinical or in vivo evidence to indicate that any commercially available insulin analogue has carcinogenic effects. Large-scale, prospective clinical and observational studies will further establish any potential link.

Cancer incidence and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with human insulin: a cohort study in Shanghai

Aim

The aim was to investigate the association between human insulin and cancer incidence and mortality in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes.

Methods

We recruited 8,774 insulin-naïve diabetes patients from the Shanghai Diabetes Registry (SDR). The follow-up rate was 85.4%. All subjects were divided into the insulin use cohort (n = 3,639) and the non-insulin use cohort (n = 5,135). The primary outcome was the first diagnosis of any cancer. The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the relative risk (RR) of cancer and mortality.

Results

We observed 98 cancer events in the insulin use cohort and 170 in the non-insulin use cohort. Cancer incidence rates were 78.6 and 74.3 per 10,000 patients per year in the insulin users and the non-insulin users, respectively. No significant difference in cancer risk was observed between the two cohorts (adjusted RR = 1.20, 95% CI 0.89–1.62, P = 0.228). Regarding site-specific cancers, only the risk of liver cancer was significantly higher in the insulin users compared to that in the non-insulin users (adjusted RR = 2.84, 95% CI 1.12–7.17, P = 0.028). The risks of overall mortality (adjusted RR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.47–2.43, P<0.0001) and death from cancer (adjusted RR = 2.16, 95% CI 1.39–3.35, P = 0.001) were all significantly higher in the insulin users than in the non-insulin users.

Conclusion

There was no excess risk of overall cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes who were treated with human insulin. However, a significantly higher risk of liver cancer was found in these patients. Moreover, insulin users showed higher risks of overall and cancer mortality. Considering that individuals treated with insulin were more likely to be advanced diabetic patients, caution should be used in interpreting these results.

Insulin glargine and cancer risk in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis

AIM

The role of insulin glargine as a risk factor for cancer is controversial in human studies. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the relationship between insulin glargine and cancer incidence.

METHODS

All observational studies and randomized controlled trials evaluating the relationship of insulin glargine and cancer risk were identified in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and the Chinese Biomedical Medical Literature Database, through March 2012. Odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated with a random-effects model. Confidence in the estimates of the obtained effects (quality of evidence) was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

RESULTS

A total of 11 studies including 448,928 study subjects and 19,128 cancer patients were finally identified for the meta-analysis. Insulin glargine use was associated with a lower odds of cancer compared with non-glargine insulin use (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98, P = 0.03; very low-quality evidence). Glargine did not increase the odds of breast cancer (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.46, P = 0.966; very low-quality evidence). Compared with non-glargine insulin, no significant association was found between insulin glargine and prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer and respiratory tract cancer. Insulin glargine use was associated with lower odds of other site-specific cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from the meta-analysis don't support the link between insulin glargine and an increased risk of cancer and the confidence in the estimates of the effects is very low. Further studies are needed to examine the relation between insulin glargine and cancer risk, especially breast cancer.

Insulin therapy and cancer in type 2 diabetes

Despite the availability of many other agents, insulin is widely used as a treatment for type 2 diabetes. In vitro, insulin stimulates the growth of cancer cells, through the interaction with insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) receptors and its own receptors. In observational surveys on type 2 diabetes, insulin therapy is associated with an increased incidence of several forms of cancer, although it is difficult to discriminate the effect of confounders from that of insulin itself. Randomized trials do not confirm the increased risk associated with insulin therapy, although they do not allow to rule out some negative effects on specific forms of cancer, at least at higher doses. Among insulin analogues, glargine has a higher affinity for the IGF-1 receptor and a greater mitogenic potency in vitro than human insulin, but it is extensively metabolized in vitro to products with low IGF-1 receptor affinity. Overall, epidemiological studies suggest a possible increase of risk with glargine, with respect to human insulin, only at high doses and for some forms of cancer (i.e., breast). Data from clinical trials do not confirm, but are still insufficient to totally exclude, such increased risk. However, beneficial effects of insulin outweigh potential cancer risks.

Long-acting basal insulin analogs: latest developments and clinical usefulness

All patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus need insulin treatment permanently, and many patients with type 2 diabetes will require insulin therapy. Basal insulin analogs are increasingly used in the treatment of diabetes, with the aim of offering a better replication of the pattern of basal endogenous secretion of insulin. Their flatter pharmacodynamic profile, with a much lower peak of action, their slow and continuous absorption into the systemic circulation, and prolonged duration, more closely duplicate the endogenous insulin secretion leading to physiological basal glycemic control and affording more flexible treatment with fewer hypoglycemia episodes. The basal analogs represent the most significant advances in 'basal insulin' supplementation, and can be used in different insulin regimens achieving the same clinical effectiveness over conventional insulins, with benefits in terms of hypoglycemia and less weight gain, and may be an option for patients with problematic hypoglycemia despite optimization of conventional insulin therapy. At present, there are no data on micro- or macrovascular endpoints, and indeed it is unlikely that these will become available, at least in the foreseeable future. The evidence for basal insulin analogs affecting the risk of cancer is limited, and overriding diabetes indications rather than putative cancer concerns should remain the principal consideration when selecting therapy in patients with diabetes.

Diabetes: glycaemic control in type 2 (drug treatments)

INTRODUCTION

Diabetes mellitus is a progressive disorder of glucose metabolism. It is estimated that about 285 million people between the ages of 20 and 79 years had diabetes worldwide in 2010, or 5% of the adult population. Type 2 diabetes may occur with obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidaemia (the metabolic syndrome), which are powerful predictors of cardiovascular disease. Without adequate blood-glucose-lowering treatment, blood glucose levels may rise progressively over time in people with type 2 diabetes. Microvascular and macrovascular complications may develop.

METHODS AND OUTCOMES

We conducted a systematic review and aimed to answer the following clinical question: What are the effects of blood-glucose-lowering medications in adults with type 2 diabetes? We searched: Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and other important databases up to February 2010 (Clinical Evidence reviews are updated periodically, please check our website for the most up-to-date version of this review). We included harms alerts from relevant organisations such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

RESULTS

We found 194 systematic reviews, RCTs, or observational studies that met our inclusion criteria. We performed a GRADE evaluation of the quality of evidence for interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

In this systematic review we present information relating to the effectiveness and safety of the following interventions: alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (AGIs), combination treatment (single, double, and triple), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogues, insulins (including conventional [human] and analogue, different regimens, different length of action), meglitinides, metformin, sulphonylureas, and thiazolidinediones.

Insulin glargine and risk of cancer: a meta-analysis

AIMS

Recently, more and more attention has been drawn on the long-term effects of insulin glargine. Here we strived to estimate the association of cancer occurrence with the use of insulin glargine.

METHODS

We searched all the publications regarding the association between cancer occurrence and the use of insulin glargine using the US National Library of Medicine's PubMed database. Data were independently extracted and analyzed using random or fixed effects meta-analysis depending upon the degree of heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Seven cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. Cancer occurrence had no significant difference in glargine-treated patients compared to patients treated with other insulins (RR=0.86, 95% CI=0.69-1.07, p=0.17, P(heterogeneity)<0.00001). In our subgroup analysis, glargine, compared to other insulins, did not increase the risk of breast cancer (RR=1.14, 95% CI=0.65-2.02, p=0.65, P(heterogeneity)=0.002), prostate cancer (RR=1.00, 95% CI=0.79-1.26, p=0.99, P(heterogeneity)=0.78), pancreatic cancer (RR=0.57, 95% CI=0.14-2.35, p=0.44, P(heterogeneity)=0.0002) and gastrointestinal cancer (RR=0.80, 95% CI=0.62-1.02, p=0.07, P(heterogeneity)=0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis of open-label studies does not support an increased cancer risk in patients treated with insulin glargine. The result provides confidence for the development of insulin glargine, but needs confirmation by further clinical studies.

Optimizing treatment strategies with insulin glargine in Type 2 diabetes

Advances in insulin therapy have made a positive contribution to improving disease management in both Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. The development of insulin analogs with time-action characteristics has made it easier to mimic physiological insulin secretion. The parallel improvement in delivery devices has also made insulin therapy more convenient, flexible and acceptable. The inevitable progression of Type 2 diabetes means that the majority of those people will also require insulin therapy at some point in their disease course. Current treatment options are many; when to initiate insulin and which regimen to choose are among the major questions confronting physicians in today's rapidly evolving environment. This article summarizes the current strategies for initiating and optimizing the use of the basal insulin analog, insulin glargine, in Type 2 diabetes, leading to the intermediate stage of insulin therapy with the introduction of meal-related, rapid-acting insulin analogs in a stepwise manner prior to a full replacement basal-bolus regimen.