Metformin exposure and survival in head and neck cancer: A large population-based cohort study

Therapeutic Potential of Anti-Diabetes Drugs and Anti-Dyslipidemia Drugs to Mitigate Head and Neck Cancer Risk in Metabolic Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Head and neck cancer (HNC) encompasses a heterogeneous group of malignancies originating in the oral cavity, pharynx, nasopharynx, larynx, paranasal sinuses, and salivary glands. Accumulating evidence indicates that metabolic syndrome (MetS) characterized by a constellation of conditions including central adiposity, hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, hypertension, and insulin resistance, may significantly influence cancer pathogenesis and progression.

RESULTS

MetS has been epidemiologically linked to elevated risk for multiple malignancies through various metabolic mechanisms involving chronic systemic inflammation, insulin resistance, and dysregulated lipid metabolism. Especially in HNC, recent studies demonstrated that MetS and metabolic imbalance conditions may contribute to carcinogenesis, disease progression, and clinical outcomes, but the exact mechanisms behind the association between excess fat accumulation and HNC risk remain unclear. Considering previous studies, pharmacological agents targeting metabolic pathways, including biguanides (metformin), thiazolidinediones, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, and HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are being investigated for potential repurposing in cancer prevention and adjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Here, we summarize the latest evidence on the relationship between MetS and HNC, highlighting the therapeutic potential of anti-diabetes drugs and anti-dyslipidemia drugs in ameliorating various pathological problems in HNC patients with MetS.

Beneficial Effect of Metformin on the Five-Year Survival in about 40,000 Patients with Head and Neck Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Even in times of new therapy regimes, the overall survival of patients with head and neck cancer remains low. Since the previous studies showed the beneficial effect of metformin medication on the survival of patients with cancer, our objective was to investigate if-and in which way-metformin medication affects the overall survival of patients with head and neck cancer.

METHODS

Clinical data pertaining to patients diagnosed with head and neck cancer (International Classification of Diseases 10 codes C00-C14, C31, and C32) were retrospectively retrieved from the TriNetX network (TriNetX, Cambridge, MA, USA). The initial cohort extracted from the network was stratified into two groups: patients on metformin medication (cohort I), and individuals not on metformin medication (cohort II). The matching criteria included age, gender, BMI, type 2 diabetes, and risk factors, such as nicotine and alcohol abuse/dependence. Kaplan-Meier analysis, risk analysis, and the calculation of odds and hazard ratios were conducted. Additionally, the Hemoglobin A1c values were subject to analysis.

RESULTS

Following matching, each cohort comprised 20,416 patients. Cohort I exhibited a higher five-year survival rate at 75.3%, in contrast to cohort II, which registered a rate of 69.8%. The odds ratio was 0.79 (95% CI = 0.75-0.83), and the hazard ratio was 0.78 (95% CI = 0.75-0.82).

CONCLUSION

Metformin medication may correlate with improved five-year survival rates in patients with head and neck cancer. Since potentially influencing factors such as comorbidities and the initial tumor stage were not available, the results of our retrospectively conducted study must be interpreted with caution.

Preventive and Therapeutic Effect of Metformin in Head and Neck Cancer: A Concise Review

BACKGROUND

Head and neck cancer (HNC) is a complex affection. Nowadays, conventional treatments are associated with many side effects, reducing the patient's quality of life. Recent studies suggest that metformin, a first-line treatment for diabetes, could decrease cancer incidence and improve cancer-related survival rates.

METHODS

This systematic review summarizes important data from studies evaluating metformin's contribution to preventing and treating HNC.

RESULTS

The results suggest a protective effect of metformin in HNC. However, no consensus has been found on its therapeutic effects. Metformin seems to confer an improved cancer-related survival rate in a diabetic population, but compared to a non-diabetic population, the review could not identify any advantages. Nevertheless, no studies presented a negative impact.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the results of this systematic review suggest that HNC patients may benefit from metformin. Indeed, it would reduce the HNC incidence. However, more studies are required to evaluate the effect on cancer-related survival rates.

The Potential Therapeutic Impact of Metformin in Glioblastoma Multiforme

In terms of frequency and aggressiveness, glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is undoubtedly the most frequent and fatal primary brain tumor. Despite advances in clinical management, the response to current treatments is dismal, with a 2-year survival rate varying between 6 and 12 percent. Metformin, a derivative of biguanide widely used in treating type 2 diabetes, has been shown to extend the lifespan of patients with various malignancies. There is limited evidence available on the long-term survival of GBM patients who have taken metformin. This research examined the literature to assess the connection between metformin's anticancer properties and GBM development. Clinical findings, together with the preclinical data from animal models and cell lines, are included in the present review. This comprehensive review covers not only the association of hyperactivation of the AMPK pathway with the anticancer activity of metformin but also other mechanisms underpinning its role in apoptosis, cell proliferation, metastasis, as well as its chemo-radio-sensitizing behavior against GBM. Current challenges and future directions for developments and applications of metformin-based therapeutics are also discussed.

Prognostic value of metformin in cancers: An updated meta-analysis based on 80 cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Experiments have shown that metformin can inhibit cancer cell growth, but clinical observations have been inconsistent, so we pooled the currently available data to evaluate the impact of metformin on cancer survival and progression.

METHODS

PubMed, web of science, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) were identified using a random-effects model to estimate the strength of the association between metformin and survival and progression in cancer patients.

RESULTS

We incorporated 80 articles published from all databases which satisfied the inclusion criterion. It showed that metformin was associated with better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR] = 0. 81; 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.77-0.85]) and cancer-specific survival (HR = 0.79; 95% CI: [0.73-0.86]), and metformin was associated with progression-free survival (HR = 0.76; 95% CI: [0.66-0.87]). In patients with diabetes mellitus, the HR of overall survival was 0.79(95% CI: [0.75-0.83]), progression-free survival was 0.72(95% CI: [0.60-0.85]), and the cancer-specific survival was 0.76(95% CI: [0.68-0.86]). It was proposed that metformin can improve the prognosis of cancer patients with diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

Based on cohort studies, metformin therapy has potential survival benefits for patients with malignancy, especially with the greatest benefits seen in breast cancer on overall survival, progression-free survival, and cancer-specific survival. And metformin also showed potential benefits in cancer-specific survival in colorectal and prostate cancer.

Survival Benefit of Metformin as an Adjuvant Treatment for Head and Neck Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background/Aims: The relationship between the efficacy of metformin and the prognosis of patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) was still unclear. This study aims to clarify the prognostic value of metformin treatment using meta-analysis.

Methods: Studies related to HNC prognosis and metformin were searched in Cochrane Library, Embase, LILACS, MEDLINE and PubMed databases. A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the association between metformin therapy and the prognosis of HNC on overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) and whether article quality, comorbidities, age, region or smoking had an influence on the prognosis of metformin treatment. Pooled hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were analyzed to assess the effect.

Results: Eleven eligible studies involving 14,694 participants were included. Metformin increased the OS (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.76–0.99), but failed on DFS (HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.40–1.09) or DSS (HR = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.41–1.14) in HNC patients. Subgroup analysis showed metformin was associated with improved OS (HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49–0.88), DFS (HR = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.26–0.92) and DSS (HR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.22–0.65) in studies with higher Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) scores. Subgroup analysis of age indicated that patients younger than 65 years (OS, HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.49–0.92) were more likely to benefit from metformin treatment. Subgroup analysis of comorbidities showed metformin significantly improved patient outcomes in studies without adjusted for comorbidities (OS, HR = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.51–0.85; DSS, HR = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.22–0.65), but not in studies that adjusted for comorbidities.

Conclusions: Metformin improved the prognosis of HNC patients as an adjuvant therapy, especially in those with higher NOS scores. Age and comorbidities of HNC patients influenced the therapeutic effect of metformin. Further well-conducted investigations are needed.

Angiotensin blockade therapy and survival in pancreatic cancer: a population study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the most aggressive and challenging cancer types to effectively treat, ranking as the fourth-leading cause of cancer death in the United States. We investigated if exposures to angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) or angiotensin I converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors after PC diagnosis are associated with survival.

METHODS

PC patients were identified by ICD-9 diagnosis and procedure codes among the 3.7 million adults living in the Emilia-Romagna Region from their administrative health care database containing patient data on demographics, hospital discharges, all-cause mortality, and outpatient pharmacy prescriptions. Cox modeling estimated covariate-adjusted mortality hazard ratios for time-dependent ARB and ACE inhibitor exposures after PC diagnosis.

RESULTS

8,158 incident PC patients were identified between 2003 and 2011, among whom 20% had pancreas resection surgery, 36% were diagnosed with metastatic disease, and 7,027 (86%) died by December 2012. Compared to otherwise similar patients, those exposed to ARBs after PC diagnosis experienced 20% lower mortality risk (HR=0.80; 95% CI: 0.72, 0.89). Those exposed to ACE inhibitors during the first three years of survival after PC diagnosis experienced 13% lower mortality risk (HR=0.87; 95% CI: 0.80, 0.94) which attenuated after surviving three years (HR=1.14; 95% CI: 0.90, 1.45).

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this large population study suggest that exposures to ARBs and ACE inhibitors after PC diagnosis are significantly associated with improved survival. ARBs and ACE inhibitors could be important considerations for treating PC patients, particularly those with the worst prognosis and most limited treatment options. Considering that these common FDA approved drugs are inexpensive to payers and present minimal increased risk of adverse events to patients, there is an urgent need for randomized clinical trials, large simple randomized trials, or pragmatic clinical trials to formally and broadly evaluate the effects of ARBs and ACE inhibitors on survival in PC patients.

Metformin inhibits hepatocellular carcinoma development by inducing apoptosis and pyroptosis through regulating FOXO3

This study aimed to expand our understanding of metformin (Met) in inhibiting hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) progression and to investigate its underlying mechanism. Met was administrated to HCC cells at 5, 10, and 20 μM, after which the cell phenotype was evaluated. RNA-seq cluster analysis was used to screen for target genes modulated by Met. Luciferase activity and ChIP assays were performed to detect the effect of FOXO3 on the transcriptional activation of NLRP3. We evaluated the effect of Met and FOXO3 and on the growth of HCC cells in vivo. Met inhibited HCC cell proliferation and promoted apoptosis. Met also induced pyroptosis of HCC cells. FOXO3 was significantly upregulated by Met treatment, and FOXO3 activated transcription of NLRP3. Cells after Met treatment together with FOXO3 knockdown have a stronger colony formation and migration ability but a lower apoptosis rate compared to the Met treatment alone group. In vivo, Met inhibited HCC tumor growth. The tumors in Met treatment and FOXO3 knockdown group grew faster than in Met treatment group. Thus, Met attenuates HCC cell development by inducing apoptosis and pyroptosis. This effect of metformin is partially dependent on FOXO3 which can activate the transcription of NLRP3.

Metformin Potentiates the Anticancer Effect of Everolimus on Cervical Cancer In Vitro and In Vivo

Simple Summary

Recent studies have shown that metformin combined with clinical chemotherapeutic drugs could cause decreased cell toxicity and attenuate tumor resistance in various types of cancer. The aim of the present study was to elucidate whether combined treatment with metformin and everolimus has a synergistic anticancer effect in human cervical cancer in vitro and in vivo. The results showed that this combined treatment synergistically inhibited the growth of human cervical cancer cell lines and xenografts in nude mice, and induced caspase-dependent apoptosis, promoting sub-G1- and G0/G1-phase arrest and enhancing mtROS production. Combined treatment also synergistically inactivated PI3K/AKT signaling and activated MAPKs signaling in cervical cancer. Our data suggested that metformin potentiates the anticancer effect of everolimus on cervical cancer, and combined treatment provides a novel therapeutic strategy for patients with cervical cancer.

Abstract

Cervical cancer is globally the fourth most common cancer in women. Metformin is a widely used drug for the treatment of type II diabetes and has been shown to possess important anticancer properties in cervical cancer. Everolimus is an mTOR inhibitor and is widely used to treat NETs, RCC, TSC, and breast cancers. The present study investigated the anticancer effects of metformin and everolimus in cervical cancer, when used alone or in combination. CaSki and C33A human cervical cancer cells were treated with different concentrations of everolimus alone or in combination with metformin. Cell viability was assessed using a CCK-8 assay. Cell apoptosis, cell-cycle, and mtROS analyses were conducted using flow cytometry. Target protein levels were analyzed by Western blotting. Related mechanisms were confirmed using appropriate inhibitors (z-VAD-fmk and BIRB796). The in vitro results were further confirmed in a xenograft tumor study. Both metformin and everolimus, when used alone, were moderately effective in inhibiting cell proliferation and inducing cell apoptosis of CaSki and C33A cells. When used in combination, these two drugs synergistically inhibited the growth of human cervical cancer cells and xenografts in nude mice, promoted sub-G1- and G0/G1-phase cell-cycle arrest, and enhanced mtROS production. The protein expressions of PI3K (p110α) and p-AKT were significantly downregulated, while P27, P21, p-p38, p-ERK, and p-JNK were upregulated following combined treatment. These results revealed that metformin potentiates the anticancer effect of everolimus on cervical cancer, and combination treatment with metformin and everolimus provides a novel therapeutic strategy for patients with cervical cancer.

Pitavastatin and metformin synergistically activate apoptosis and autophagy in pancreatic cancer cells

Pancreatic cancer is the seventh leading cause of cancer-related deaths globally. Metformin is the standard first-line of treatment for hyperglycemia in Type 2 diabetes, whereas pitavastatin is a cholesterol-lowering drug used to prevent cardiovascular diseases. Both these agents evidently exert anticancer effects on pancreatic cancer; however, it remains unclear whether cotreatment using them has additive or synergistic anticancer effects on pancreatic cancer. Thus, we herein used the ASPC-1 and PANC-1 cells and treated them with metformin and/or pitavastatin. We performed the cell viability assay, transwell migration assay, and cell cycle analysis using flow cytometry. Western blotting was used to determine protein levels. We found that cotreatment with metformin (30 mM) and pitavastatin (10 μM) significantly reduced cell viability; caused G0/G1 cell cycle arrest; upregulated the expression levels of Bax, PCNA, cleaved PARP-1, cleaved caspase-3, LC3 II, and p27 ^Kip1 /p21^Cip1 ; and inhibited cell migration. The combination index value for cell viability indicated a synergistic interaction between metformin and pitavastatin. Moreover, cotreating the cells with metformin (30 mM) and pitavastatin (10 μM) could preserve mitochondrial function, activate AMPK, and inhibit PI3K/mTOR than treatment with metformin or pitavastatin alone. These findings clearly indicated that metformin plus pitavastatin had a synergistic anticancer effect on pancreatic cancer cells, potentially caused due to the activation of AMPK and inhibition of PI3K/mTOR signaling. Altogether, our results provide that use of metformin plus pitavastatin maybe serve as a chemotherapeutic agent for human pancreatic cancer in future.

Perioperative mortality of head and neck cancers

Background

Head and neck cancers are aggressive cancers, most clinical studies focused on the prognosis of patients with head and neck cancer. However, perioperative mortality was rarely mentioned.

Methods

A retrospective analysis was performed using all head and neck cancer patients admitting in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery of the Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University from January 2010 to December 2019. The analysis of overall survival and progression-free survival were performed using the Kaplan–Meier method, and cross tabulation with chi-squared testing was applied to analyze the difference in parameters between groups.

Results

From January 2010 to December 2019, a total of 6576 patients with head and neck cancers were admitted to our department and 7 died in the hospital, all of whom were middle-aged and elderly patients including 6 males and 1 female. The perioperative mortality rate (POMR) was about 1‰. The causes of death included acute heart failure, rupture of large blood vessels in the neck, hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy due to asphyxia, respiratory failure and cardiopulmonary arrest.

Conclusion

Preoperative radiotherapy, previous chemotherapy, hypertension, diabetes, advanced clinical stage and postoperative infection are risk factors for perioperative mortality of head and neck cancer.

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.

The effect of metformin on lung cancer risk and survival in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Metformin has received increasing attention owing to its potential protective effect against cancer. We aimed to summarize evidence regarding the association between metformin and the risk or survival in lung cancer patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We selected observational studies examining the association between exposure to metformin and the risk or survival in lung cancer. Available publications were searched in PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, Wiley and SpringerLink databases. Meta-analysis was performed with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) as effect measures for risk or survival in lung cancer.

RESULTS

Eighteen studies (eight on lung cancer risk and ten on lung cancer survival) were included. Metformin treatment was associated with decreased lung cancer incidence (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70-0.86) and increased lung cancer survival (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.55-0.77). In the subgroup analysis by ethnicity, a significant protective effect of metformin use on lung cancer risk was observed among Asian patients (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.56-0.76), but not in European patients. On the other hand, the protective effect of metformin use on lung cancer survival was observed in both Asian (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.49-0.66) and non-Asian (HR 0.79; 95% CI 0.71-0.88) patients. In the subgroup analysis by histology, a protective effect of metformin on lung cancer survival was observed in both non-small-cell lung cancer (HR 0.68; 95% CI 0.54-0.84) and small-cell lung cancer (HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.39-0.69). Funnel plot showed that no significant publication bias existed.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that metformin is significantly associated with a decreased risk and increased survival in lung cancer.

The Association between Metformin and Survival of Head and Neck Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 7 Retrospective Cohort Studies

BACKGROUND

Metformin has been associated with improved survival outcomes in various malignancies. However, observational studies in head and neck cancer are inconsistent.

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to summarize and quantify the relationship between metformin use and the survival of head and neck cancer.

METHODS

A meta-analysis based on cohort studies was systematically conducted (published up to Jan 18, 2020), identified from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and Scopus databases. Summary hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Seven retrospective cohort studies including 3,285 head and neck cancer patients were included. The association between the use of metformin and cancer survival was not statistically significant: summarized HR of 0.89 (95% CI 0.66-1.18, P=0.413, I2=64.0%) for overall survival, summarized HR of 0.65 (95% CI 0.31-1.35, P=0.246, I2=60.3%) for disease-free survival, and summarized HR of 0.69 (95% CI 0.40-1.20, P=0.191, I2=73.1%) for disease-specific survival.

CONCLUSION

In this meta-analysis of 7 retrospective cohort studies, there was not a statistically significant association between the use of metformin and better survival for head and neck cancer. However, the analysis may have been underpowered. More studies of prospective designs with larger sample sizes are needed to investigate the effect of metformin on the survival of head and neck cancer.