Metformin Addition to Chemotherapy in Stage IV Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: an Open Label Randomized Controlled Study

Cardiovascular/anti-inflammatory drugs repurposed for treating or preventing cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, statins, and metformin) approved to treat diseases such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus to the field of oncology. Moreover, given growing costs with cancer care, these medications have offered a potentially more affordable avenue to treat or prevent recurrence of cancer. We sought to investigate the anti-cancer effects of drugs repurposed from cardiology or anti-inflammatories to treat cancer. We specifically evaluated the following drug classes: HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors, aspirin, metformin, and both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We also included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) because they exert a similar mechanism to aspirin by blocking prostaglandins and reducing inflammation that is thought to promote the development of cancer.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature review using PubMed and Web of Science with search terms including "aspirin," "NSAID," "statin" (including specific statin drug names), "metformin," "ACE inhibitors," and "ARBs" (including specific anti-hypertensive drug names) in combination with "cancer." Searches were limited to human studies published between 2000 and 2023.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The number and percentage of studies reported positive results and pooled estimates of overall survival, progression-free survival, response, and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

We reviewed 3094 titles and included 67 randomized clinical trials. The most common drugs that were tested were metformin (n = 21; 30.9%), celecoxib (n = 20; 29.4%), and simvastatin (n = 8; 11.8%). There was only one study that tested cardiac glycosides and none that studied ACE inhibitors. The most common tumor types were non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 19; 27.9%); breast (n = 8; 20.6%), colorectal (n = 7; 10.3%), and hepatocellular (n = 6; 8.8%). Most studies were conducted in a phase II trial (n = 38; 55.9%). Most studies were tested in metastatic cancers (n = 49; 72.1%) and in the first-line setting (n = 36; 521.9%). Four studies (5.9%) were stopped early because of difficulty with accrual. The majority of studies did not demonstrate an improvement in either progression-free survival (86.1% of studies testing progression-free survival) or in overall survival (94.3% of studies testing overall survival). Progression-free survival was improved in five studies (7.4%), and overall survival was improved in three studies (4.4%). Overall survival was significantly worse in two studies (3.8% of studies testing overall survival), and progression-free survival was worse in one study (2.8% of studies testing progression-free survival).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Despite promising pre-clinical and population-based data, cardiovascular drugs and anti-inflammatory medications have overall not demonstrated benefit in the treatment or preventing recurrence of cancer. These findings may help guide future potential clinical trials involving these medications when applied in oncology.

Targeting cancer and immune cell metabolism with the complex I inhibitors metformin and IACS-010759

Metformin and IACS-010759 are two distinct antimetabolic agents. Metformin, an established antidiabetic drug, mildly inhibits mitochondrial complex I, while IACS-010759 is a new potent mitochondrial complex I inhibitor. Mitochondria is pivotal in the energy metabolism of cells by providing adenosine triphosphate through oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS). Hence, mitochondrial metabolism and OXPHOS become a vulnerability when targeted in cancer cells. Both drugs have promising antitumoral effects in diverse cancers, supported by preclinical in vitro and in vivo studies. We present evidence of their direct impact on cancer cells and their immunomodulatory effects. In clinical studies, while observational epidemiologic studies on metformin were encouraging, actual trial results were not as expected. However, IACS-01075 exhibited major adverse effects, thereby causing a metabolic shift to glycolysis and elevated lactic acid concentrations. Therefore, the future outlook for these two drugs depends on preventive clinical trials for metformin and investigations into the plausible toxic effects on normal cells for IACS-01075.

Current status and frontier tracking of clinical trials on Metformin for cancer treatment

PURPOSE

Metformin has been used clinically for more than six decades. Over time, numerous remarkable effects of metformin beyond the clinic have been discovered and discussed. Metformin has been shown to have a favorable impact on cancer therapy in addition to its clinically recognized hypoglycemic effect. However, the antitumor efficacy of metformin in humans has not been clearly demonstrated yet. Hence, a systematic analysis of the existing trials is necessary.

METHODS

Here, we retrieved clinical trials from the Clinical Trials.gov database to overview the clinical development of metformin for the treatment of cancer, analyze existing clinical results, and summarize some promising applications for specific cancer therapies.

RESULTS

The potential application of metformin contains three directions: Firstly, improvement of metabolic factors associated with treatment effects, such as insulin resistance and peripheral neuropathy. Secondly, in combination with immune checkpoint blockade effects. Finally, use it for the endocrine treatment of hormone-dependent cancers.

CONCLUSION

Although the outcomes of metformin as a repurposed agent in some trials have been unsatisfactory, it still has the potential to be used in select cancer therapy settings.

Efficacy and safety of metformin in combination with chemotherapy in cancer patients without diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The results of a meta-analysis of retrospective studies suggest that the use of metformin in cancer patients may prolong progression-free disease survival and overall survival. However, the studies included in the meta-analysis did not strictly distinguish between patients with or without type 2 diabetes mellitus. Therefore, further studies are needed to assess whether the use of adjuvant chemotherapy with metformin in cancer patients without diabetes improves prognosis.

Method

Systematic searches of Embase, Pubmed, and The Cochrane library were performed for the subject terms metformin and neoplasm and for free words. Data related to PFS, OS were extracted according to inclusion exclusion criteria. The data were combined and meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 to confirm the efficacy and safety of metformin administration.

Results

There were 3228 publications retrieved from the database and a total of 13 publications with 955 patients were included in the meta-analysis after screening. All included studies were randomised controlled trials. Metformin combined with adjuvant chemotherapy did not improve progression-free survival (HR=1,95CI 0.79-1.25), overall survival (HR=0.91,95% CI 0.69-1.20) and did not improve objective disease response rates in patients. There was no significant difference in grade 3-4 adverse reactions compared to placebo.

Conclusion

In this meta-analysis of randomised controlled trial studies, we found that chemotherapy in combination with metformin in cancer patients without diabetes did not prolong progression-free survival and overall survival and improved disease control in patients, although there was no significant difference in terms of safety. More high-quality randomised controlled trials are needed in the future to confirm the in vivo anti-tumour activity and survival benefit of metformin.

Targeting monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) in cancer: How close are we to the clinics?

As a result of metabolic reprogramming, cancer cells display high rates of glycolysis, causing an excess production of lactate along with an increase in extracellular acidity. Proton-linked monocarboxylate transporters (MCTs) are crucial in the maintenance of this metabolic phenotype, by mediating the proton-coupled lactate flux across cell membranes, also contributing to cancer cell pH regulation. Among the proteins codified by the SLC16 gene family, MCT1 and MCT4 isoforms are the most explored in cancers, being overexpressed in many cancer types, from solid tumours to haematological malignancies. Similarly to what occurs in particular physiological settings, MCT1 and MCT4 are able to mediate lactate shuttles among cancer cells, and also between cancer and stromal cells in the tumour microenvironment. This form of metabolic cooperation is responsible for important cancer aggressiveness features, such as cell proliferation, survival, angiogenesis, migration, invasion, metastasis, immune tolerance and therapy resistance. The growing understanding of MCT functions and regulation is offering a new path to the design of novel inhibitors that can be foreseen in clinical practices. This review provides an overview of the role of MCT isoforms in cancer and summarizes the recent advances in their pharmacological targeting, highlighting the potential of new potent and selective MCT1 and/or MCT4 inhibitors in cancer therapeutics, and anticipating its inclusion in clinical practice.

Addition of metformin for non-small cell lung cancer patients receiving antineoplastic agents

Background and purpose: Previous studies have found that metformin can inhibit tumor growth and improve outcomes for cancer patients. However, the association between the addition of metformin to the treatment regimen and survival in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving antineoplastic agents such as chemotherapy drugs, epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of metformin in NSCLC patients who received the aforementioned antineoplastic therapies.

Methods: Several electronic databases were searched for relevant studies published by 10 September 2022. The primary and secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS); eligible studies were those comparing patients with and without the addition of metformin. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were combined, with all statistical analyses performed using STATA 15.0.

Results: A total of 19 studies involving 6,419 participants were included, of which six were randomized controlled trials. The overall pooled results indicate that the addition of metformin improved OS (HR = 0.84, 95% CI: 0.71–0.98, p = 0.029) and PFS (HR = 0.85, 95% CI: 0.74–0.99, p = 0.039). However, subgroup analysis based on treatment type and comorbidity of diabetes mellitus demonstrated that improvements in OS and PFS were observed only in diabetic and EGFR-TKI-treated patients (OS: HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.45–0.90, p = 0.011; PFS: HR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.34–1.03, p = 0.061).

Conclusion: Overall, this meta-analysis found that metformin use could improve outcomes for diabetic patients receiving EGFR-TKIs. However, no significant association between the addition of metformin and the survival of non-diabetic NSCLC patients receiving chemotherapy or ICI therapy was identified based on the current evidence.

Efficacy of metformin therapy in patients with cancer: a meta-analysis of 22 randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To investigate whether metformin monotherapy or adjunctive therapy improves the prognosis in patients with any type of cancer compared to non-metformin users (age ≥18).

METHODS

Databases (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) and clinical trial registries ( ClinicalTrials.gov ; the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform) were screened for randomized, controlled trials (RCT) reporting at least progression-free survival (PFS) and/or overall survival (OS). Main outcome measures included hazard ratios (HR), and combined HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Of the 8419 records screened, 22 RCTs comprising 5943 participants were included. Pooled HRs were not statistically significant in both PFS (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.82-1.15, I² = 50%) and OS (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86-1.13, I² = 33%) for patients with cancer between the metformin and control groups. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that metformin treatment was associated with a marginally significant improvement in PFS in reproductive system cancers (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.74-1.00) and a significantly worse PFS in digestive system cancers (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.03-2.04). The PFS or OS was observed consistently across maintenance dose, diabetes exclusion, median follow-up, risk of bias, and combined antitumoral therapies.

CONCLUSION

Metformin treatment was not associated with cancer-related mortality in adults compared with placebo or no treatment. However, metformin implied beneficial effects in the PFS of the patients with reproductive system cancers but was related to a worse PFS in digestive system cancers.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number CRD42022324672.

Immunomodulatory and Antiaging Mechanisms of Resveratrol, Rapamycin, and Metformin: Focus on mTOR and AMPK Signaling Networks

Aging results from the progressive dysregulation of several molecular pathways and mTOR and AMPK signaling have been suggested to play a role in the complex changes in key biological networks involved in cellular senescence. Moreover, multiple factors, including poor nutritional balance, drive immunosenescence progression, one of the meaningful aspects of aging. Unsurprisingly, nutraceutical and pharmacological interventions could help maintain an optimal biological response by providing essential bioactive micronutrients required for the development, maintenance, and the expression of the immune response at all stages of life. In this regard, many studies have provided evidence of potential antiaging properties of resveratrol, as well as rapamycin and metformin. Indeed, in vitro and in vivo models have demonstrated for these molecules a number of positive effects associated with healthy aging. The current review focuses on the mechanisms of action of these three important compounds and their suggested use for the clinical treatment of immunosenescence and aging.

Will We Unlock the Benefit of Metformin for Patients with Lung Cancer? Lessons from Current Evidence and New Hypotheses

Metformin has been under basic and clinical study as an oncological repurposing pharmacological agent for several years, stemming from observational studies which consistently evidenced that subjects who were treated with metformin had a reduced risk for development of cancer throughout their lives, as well as improved survival outcomes when diagnosed with neoplastic diseases. As a result, several basic science studies have attempted to dissect the relationship between metformin’s metabolic mechanism of action and antineoplastic cellular signaling pathways. Evidence in this regard was compelling enough that a myriad of randomized clinical trials was planned and conducted in order to establish the effect of metformin treatment for patients with diverse neoplasms, including lung cancer. As with most novel antineoplastic agents, early results from these studies have been mostly discouraging, though a recent analysis that incorporated body mass index may provide significant information regarding which patient subgroups might derive the most benefit from the addition of metformin to their anticancer treatment. Much in line with the current pipeline for anticancer agents, it appears that the benefit of metformin may be circumscribed to a specific patient subgroup. If so, addition of metformin to antineoplastic agents could prove one of the most cost-effective interventions proposed in the context of precision oncology. Currently published reviews mostly rely on a widely questioned mechanism of action by metformin, which fails to consider the differential effects of the drug in lean vs. obese subjects. In this review, we analyze the pre-clinical and clinical information available to date regarding the use of metformin in various subtypes of lung cancer and, further, we present evidence as to the differential metabolic effects of metformin in lean and obese subjects where, paradoxically, the obese subjects have reported more benefit with the addition of metformin treatment. The novel mechanisms of action described for this biguanide may explain the different results observed in clinical trials published in the last decade. Lastly, we present novel hypothesis regarding potential biomarkers to identify who might reap benefit from this intervention, including the role of prolyl hydroxylase domain 3 (PHD3) expression to modify metabolic phenotypes in malignant diseases.

Combined regimens of cisplatin and metformin in cancer therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Cancer cell resistance to chemotherapy agents is a challenging issue in treating patients with cancer. Findings suggest that a combination of drugs may have synergistic or additive effects. in the present study, we systematically reviewed the combined regimens of metformin with cisplatin in various treating cancers.

METHODS

A comprehensive systematic search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and other relevant databases with the following keyword "metformin", "cisplatin", "combination", "using all their equivalents and similar terms. Pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals of cell viability and tumor volume as primary outcomes were calculated using Der-Simonian and Laird method while random effects meta-analysis was used, taking into account clinical and statistical heterogeneity.

RESULTS

Overall, 44 studies were retrieved, Findings of the present meta-analysis showed that combined regimens of metformin plus cisplatin was significantly associated with decreased odds of tumor volume and cell viability for all cancers compared with cisplatin alone (pooled OR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.27, 0.58) and (pooled OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.42, 0.58) respectively. The result was same for cell viability in lung cancer (pooled OR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.49, 0.70). The tumor size reduction and the response rate were evident in the animal xenografts model.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicated that combining metformin with cisplatin is a practical therapeutic approach to increase treatment efficacy in the case of cell viability and tumor volume and minimize side effects. A combination of metformin with cisplatin could enhance treatment efficacy through synergistic inhibitory effects on the growth of cancer cells.

The effect of metformin on bladder cancer incidence and outcomes –a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Effective oral treatment options for Urothelial bladder cancer (BC) are lacking. Metformin, the most frequently used oral drug in type II diabetes mellitus, has putative anticancer properties and could, therefore, influence BC incidence and treatment outcomes. We systematically reviewed the current literature regarding the effect of metformin on BC incidence and oncological outcomes in non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) and muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). METHODS: This review was conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines. Literature was gathered through a systematic search in PubMed/Medline, EMBASE and the Cochrane library. Risk of bias was determined using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-randomized trials. Hazard ratios (HRs) were extracted and pooled in a random-model meta-analysis. RESULTS: We reviewed 13 studies, including 3,315,320 patients, considering the risk of developing BC after metformin exposure and 9 studies, including 4,006 patients, on oncological outcomes of patients with BC. Metformin did not affect BC incidence (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.87 –1.09) or oncological outcomes for NMIBC but did show a reduced risk of recurrence (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.32 –0.84), cancer-specific mortality (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.43 –0.78) and overall mortality (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 –0.92) in MIBC. CONCLUSIONS: The role of metformin in the prevention and treatment of BC in patients remains unclear. Although a beneficial effect of metformin on treatment outcomes of certain stages of BC may exist, a definitive conclusion cannot be drawn. Prospective clinical trials are needed to assess the efficacy of metformin for BC treatment.

Metformin as a Potential Treatment Option for Endometriosis

Endometriosis is a common disease in women of reproductive age, and its pathogenesis seems to be largely affected by hormone imbalance, inflammation, oxidative stress, and autophagy dysregulation. These pathophysiological disturbances interact with one another through mechanisms that are still awaiting elucidation. The aim of this article is to present current knowledge regarding the possibilities of using metformin in the pharmacological treatment of endometriosis. Metformin is an insulin sensitizer widely used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The pleiotropic effects of metformin are mainly exerted through the activation of AMP-activated protein kinase, which is the key cellular energy homeostasis regulator that inhibits mTOR, a major autophagy suppressor. Metformin regresses endometriotic implants by increasing the activity of superoxide dismutase. It is also an inhibitor of metalloproteinase-2, decreasing the levels of the vascular endothelial growth factor and matrix metalloproteinase-9 in animal studies. In endometriosis, metformin might modify the stroma-epithelium communication via Wnt2/β-catenin. With its unique therapeutic mechanisms and no serious side effects, metformin seems to be a helpful anti-inflammatory and anti-proliferative agent in the treatment of endometriosis. It could be a missing link for the successful treatment of this chronic disease.

The role of metformin on lung cancer survival: the first systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized clinical trials

PURPOSE

To assess the effects of metformin use on lung cancer (LC) survival according to summarized results from observational studies (OBs) and randomized clinical trials (RCTs).

METHODS

We systematically searched electronic databases and, to our knowledge, for the first time, RCTs were included in a systematic review and meta-analysis about the role of metformin on LC survival. We carried out meta-analyses separately for OBs and RCTs. Analyses for overall survival (OS) concerning OBs were stratified by studies with and without time-dependent approach. Subgroup analyses were adopted for OBs to identify the sources of heterogeneity. Included studies were assessed for quality.

RESULTS

We identified ten OBs and four RCTs. For OBs, metformin use was associated with improved OS for LC patients. Only two studies used time-dependent approach in which a higher ratio was found when compared to the non-use of the time-dependent analysis in eight studies. OBs were classified as high quality but the risk of bias was "unclear" in eight OBs due to absence of the time-dependent analysis. For RCTs, metformin use was not beneficial for OS and neither for progression-free survival. Heterogeneous quality was found among RCTs. Sources of bias that could alter significantly the results or raise doubts were identified in RCTs.

CONCLUSION

Time-dependent analysis should be considered an appropriate strategy for OBs focused on the metformin use for LC patients' survival, and further studies applying this approach are required. More well-designed RCTs are needed to provide consistent results for the association between metformin use and LC survival.

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.

Metformin Adjunct With Antineoplastic Agents for the Treatment of Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Observational Cohort Studies

Objective: Resistance to anticancer agents ensures a poor prognosis in patients with lung cancer. Metformin could enhance the anticancer effects of standard antineoplastic agents [traditional chemotherapy drugs, epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (EGFR-TKIs), or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs)]; however, it is unclear whether metformin can be combined with antineoplastic agents in the treatment of lung cancer. To explore the efficacy of combinational strategies, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis for diabetic and non-diabetic patients with lung cancer.

Method: An electronic literature search was performed to obtain relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational cohort studies. Hazard ratios (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) of overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) outcomes were extracted. Subgroup analysis by antineoplastic agents, study type, histology and clinical stage were investigated.

Results: 14 studies (three RCTs and eleven observational cohort studies) consisting 3,856 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to standard antineoplastic agents alone (traditional chemotherapy drugs, EGFR-TKIs or ICIs), the antineoplastic agents combined with metformin significantly improved OS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.66–0.81, p < 0.00001) and PFS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59–0.88, p = 0.001); a similar association was found in observational evidence. Limited data from RCTs showed no differences in OS or PFS.

Conclusion: Metformin plus antineoplastic agents may improve survival outcomes of patients with lung cancer. Further investigation is needed.

Metformin use and lung cancer survival: a population-based study in Norway

BACKGROUND

We assessed associations between metformin use and survival in a nationwide Norwegian cohort of lung cancer (LC) patients.

METHODS

The study linked 22,324 LC patients from the Cancer Registry of Norway diagnosed 2005-2014 with the Norwegian Prescription Database. We estimated associations of pre- and post-diagnostic metformin use with overall survival (OS) and LC-specific survival (LCSS) using multivariable time-fixed and time-dependent Cox regression.

RESULTS

Pre-diagnostic metformin use was not associated with improved survival in all patients. Nevertheless, pre-diagnostic metformin use was associated with better LCSS in squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) patients (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.62-0.99) and in patients with regional stage SCC (HR = 0.67; 95%CI 0.47-0.95). Post-diagnostic metformin use was associated with improved LCSS in all patients (HR = 0.83; 95%CI 0.73-0.95), in patients with SCC (HR = 0.75; 95%CI 0.57-0.98), regional stage LC (HR = 0.74; 95%CI 0.59-0.94), and regional stage SCC (HR = 0.57; 95%CI 0.38-0.86). OS showed similar results. Analyses of cumulative use showed a dose-response relationship in all patients, patients with adenocarcinoma and SCC, and with regional and metastatic LC.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin use was associated with improved survival, especially LCSS in patients with regional stage SCC. Further prospective studies are required to clarify the role of metformin in LC treatment.

The Chemosensitizing Role of Metformin in Anti-Cancer Therapy

Chemoresistance, which leads to the failure of chemotherapy and further tumor recurrence, presents the largest hurdle for the success of anti-cancer therapy. In recent years, metformin, a widely used first-line antidiabetic drug, has attracted increasing attention for its anti-cancer effects. A growing body of evidence indicates that metformin can sensitize tumor responses to different chemotherapeutic drugs, such as hormone modulating drugs, anti-metabolite drugs, antibiotics, and DNA-damaging drugs via selective targeting of Cancer Stem Cells (CSCs), improving the hypoxic microenvironment, and by suppressing tumor metastasis and inflammation. In addition, metformin may regulate metabolic programming, induce apoptosis, reverse Epithelial to Mesenchymal Transition (EMT), and Multidrug Resistance (MDR). In this review, we summarize the chemosensitization effects of metformin and focus primarily on its molecular mechanisms in enhancing the sensitivity of multiple chemotherapeutic drugs, through targeting of mTOR, ERK/P70S6K, NF-κB/HIF-1 α, and Mitogen- Activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) signaling pathways, as well as by down-regulating the expression of CSC genes and Pyruvate Kinase isoenzyme M2 (PKM2). Through a comprehensive understanding of the molecular mechanisms of chemosensitization provided in this review, the rationale for the use of metformin in clinical combination medications can be more systematically and thoroughly explored for wider adoption against numerous cancer types.>.

Resveratrol, Rapamycin and Metformin as Modulators of Antiviral Pathways

Balanced nutrition and appropriate dietary interventions are fundamental in the prevention and management of viral infections. Additionally, accurate modulation of the inflammatory response is necessary to achieve an adequate antiviral immune response. Many studies, both in vitro with mammalian cells and in vivo with small animal models, have highlighted the antiviral properties of resveratrol, rapamycin and metformin. The current review outlines the mechanisms of action of these three important compounds on the cellular pathways involved with viral replication and the mechanisms of virus-related diseases, as well as the current status of their clinical use.

Metformin induces apoptosis and inhibits migration by activating the AMPK/p53 axis and suppressing PI3K/AKT signaling in human cervical cancer cells

Human cervical cancer is the fourth most common malignancy among women worldwide, and it is expected to result in 460,000 deaths per year by 2040. Moreover, patients with cervical cancer often display drug resistance and severe side effects; therefore, the development of effective novel chemotherapeutic agents is important. In the present study, the effects of metformin, a first-line therapeutic drug for type 2 diabetes mellitus, were evaluated in cervical cancer. Compared with the control group, metformin significantly inhibited cell viability and migration, and induced apoptosis and cell cycle arrest in human cervical cancer cell lines (CaSki and HeLa). Following metformin treatment, the protein expression levels of p-AMP-activated protein kinase (p-AMPK), which promotes cell death, and the tumor suppressor protein p-p53 were remarkably upregulated in CaSki and C33A cells compared with the control group. Furthermore, compared with the control group, metformin significantly suppressed the PI3K/AKT signaling pathway in CaSki, C33A and HeLa cells. Compound C (an AMPK inhibitor) significantly reversed the effects of metformin on CaSki, C33A and HeLa cell viability, and AMPK and p53 phosphorylation. The results of the present study suggested that metformin induced AMPK-mediated apoptosis, thus metformin may serve as a chemotherapeutic agent for human cervical cancer.

The potential adjunctive benefit of adding metformin to standard treatment in inoperable cancer patients: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Recently, there have been several randomized clinical trials (RCTs) conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of metformin plus standard treatment in inoperable cancer patients. Our meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy of metformin in combination with standard treatment in inoperable cancer patients.

Methods

PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched for relevant RCTs investigating the efficacy of adding metformin to standard treatment for cancer patients. The pooled relative risk (RR) for tumor response and safety was calculated to assess the efficacy of combining metformin with standard treatment. Meta-analysis was subsequently performed to pool the hazard ratio (HR) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

Ten RCTs comprising 1033 patients were included in our current meta-analysis. In patients with breast cancer, results of meta-analysis showed that the addition of metformin to standard treatment was beneficial to objective response rate (ORR) with 30.3% (33/109) in the metformin plus standard treatment group and 16.1% (18/112) in the placebo group (RR 1.92, 95% CI: 1.19–3.10, P=0.008). OS and PFS were not significantly improved in patients who received metformin plus standard treatment compared with those who received placebo plus standard treatment (OS: HR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.71–1.46, P=0.916; PFS: HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.86–1.50, P=0.366). For lung cancer patients, meta-analysis results showed adding metformin to standard treatment could benefit ORR (metformin 65.3% vs. placebo 54.6%, RR 1.22, 95% CI: 1.03–1.43, P=0.018) with no significant survival benefit in the metformin group. For patients with pancreatic cancer, the pooled ORR was 17.6% (16/91) in metformin plus standard treatment group and 20% (18/90) in the placebo group, indicating metformin did not benefit ORR (RR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.49–1.49, P=0.576). Besides, the addition of metformin to standard treatment did not increase the incidence rate of adverse effects.

Conclusions

Our results indicated that addition of metformin to standard treatment was beneficial to ORR in inoperable breast or lung cancer patients without increasing the incidence of adverse effects. However, adding metformin to standard treatment could not benefit OS and PFS.

Phase I study of metformin in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer

Background Metformin use is associated with reduced cancer risk in epidemiological studies and has preclinical anti-cancer activity in ovarian cancer models. The primary objective of this phase I study was to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of metformin in combination with carboplatin/paclitaxel in patients with ovarian cancer. Secondary objectives were to describe safety and pharmacokinetics. Methods In this single-center trial the RP2D of metformin in combination with carboplatin area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) 6 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks (q3w) in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer was determined using a 3 + 3 escalation rule at three fixed dose levels: 500 mg three times daily (tds), 850 mg tds and 1000 mg tds. Metformin was commenced on day 3 of cycle 1 and continued until 3 weeks after the last chemotherapy administration. The RP2D was defined as the dose level at which 0 of 3 or ≤ 1 of 6 evaluable subjects experienced a metformin-related dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Safety was assessed according to CTCAE v4.0. Plasma and serum samples for pharmacokinetic (PK) analyses were collected during treatment cycles 1 and 2. Results Fifteen patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and an indication for neo-adjuvant (n = 5) or palliative (n = 10) treatment were included. No DLTs were observed. Three patients discontinued study treatment during cycle 1 for other reasons than DLT. Six patients were treated at the RP2D of metformin 1000 mg tds. The most frequent low-grade toxicities were anemia, hypomagnesemia and diarrhea. Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) occurred in ten patients, most common were leucopenia (n = 4), thrombocytopenia (n = 3) and increased GGT (n = 3). There were no grade 4 AEs. Metformin increased the platinum (Pt) AUC (Δ22%, p = 0.013) and decreased the Pt clearance (Δ-28%, p = 0.013). Metformin plasma levels were all within the therapeutic range for diabetic patients (0.1-4 mg/L). Conclusion The RP2D of metformin in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel in advanced ovarian cancer is 1000 mg tds. This is higher than the RP2D reported for combination with targeted agents. A potential PK interaction of metformin with carboplatin was identified.

Antitumor Activity of Combination Therapy with Metformin and Trametinib in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Cells

Metformin has been widely used as an antidiabetic drug, and reported to inhibit cell proliferation in many cancers including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In NSCLC cells, metformin suppresses PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway, but effect of metformin on RAS/ RAF/MEK/ERK signaling pathway is controversial; several studies showed the inhibition of ERK activity, while others demonstrated the activation of ERK in response to metformin exposure. Metformin-induced activation of ERK is therapeutically important, since metformin could enhance cell proliferation through RAS/RAF/MEK/ERK pathway and lead to impairment of its anticancer activity suppressing PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, requiring blockade of both signaling pathways for more efficient antitumor effect. The present study tested the combination therapy of metformin and trametinib by monitoring the alterations of regulatory effector proteins of cell signaling pathways and the effect of the combination on cell viability in NCI-H2087 NSCLC cells with NRAS and BRAF mutations. We show that metformin alone blocks PI3K/AKT/mTOR signaling pathway but induces the activation and phosphorylation of ERK. The combination therapy synergistically decreased cell viability in treatment with low doses of two drugs, while it gave antagonistic effect with high doses. These findings suggest that the efficacy of metformin and trametinib combination therapy may depend on the alteration of ERK activity induced by metformin and specific cellular context of cancer cells.

Metformin: current clinical applications in nondiabetic patients with cancer

Metformin is one of the most commonly used first-line oral medications for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Multiple observational studies, reviewed in numerous systematic reviews, have shown that metformin treatment may not only reduce the risk of cancer but may also improve the efficacy of cancer treatment in diabetic patients. Recent studies have been conducted to determine whether a similar protective effect can be demonstrated in nondiabetic cancer patients. However, the results are controversial. The potential optimal dose, schedule, and duration of metformin treatment and the heterogeneity of histological subtypes and genotypes among cancer patients might contribute to the different clinical benefits. In addition, as the immune property of metformin was investigated, further studies of the immunomodulatory effect of metformin on cancer cells should also be taken into account to optimize its clinical use. In this review, we present and discuss the latest findings regarding the anticancer potential of metformin in nondiabetic patients with cancer.

Metformin Prolongs Survival in Type 2 Diabetes Lung Cancer Patients With EGFR-TKIs

Background: Metformin use reportedly reduces cancer risk and improves survival in lung cancer patients. This study aimed to investigate the effect of metformin use in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and lung cancer receiving epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) therapy. Methods: A nationwide, population-based cohort study was conducted using the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. From January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2012, a total of 373 metformin and 1260 non-metformin lung cancer cohorts with type 2 DM and EGFR-TKI treatment were studied. Results: Metformin use was significantly associated with a reduced risk of death (hazard ratio: 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.85, P < .001), as well as a significantly longer median progression-free survival (9.2 months, 95% CI: 8.6-11.7, vs 6.4 months, 95% CI: 5.9-7.2 months, P < .001) and median overall survival (33.4 months, 95% CI: 29.4-40.2, vs 25.4 months, 95% CI: 23.7-27.2 months, P < 0.001). Conclusions: In conclusion, metformin may potentially enhance the therapeutic effect and increase survival in type 2 DM patients with lung cancer receiving EGFR-TKI therapy.

Competitive glucose metabolism as a target to boost bladder cancer immunotherapy

Bladder cancer - the tenth most frequent cancer worldwide - has a heterogeneous natural history and clinical behaviour. The predominant histological subtype, urothelial bladder carcinoma, is characterized by high recurrence rates, progression and both primary and acquired resistance to platinum-based therapy, which impose a considerable economic burden on health-care systems and have substantial effects on the quality of life and the overall outcomes of patients with bladder cancer. The incidence of urothelial tumours is increasing owing to population growth and ageing, so novel therapeutic options are vital. Based on work by The Cancer Genome Atlas project, which has identified targetable vulnerabilities in bladder cancer, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have arisen as an effective alternative for managing advanced disease. However, although ICIs have shown durable responses in a subset of patients with bladder cancer, the overall response rate is only ~15-25%, which increases the demand for biomarkers of response and therapeutic strategies that can overcome resistance to ICIs. In ICI non-responders, cancer cells use effective mechanisms to evade immune cell antitumour activity; the overlapping Warburg effect machinery of cancer and immune cells is a putative determinant of the immunosuppressive phenotype in bladder cancer. This energetic interplay between tumour and immune cells leads to metabolic competition in the tumour ecosystem, limiting nutrient availability and leading to microenvironmental acidosis, which hinders immune cell function. Thus, molecular hallmarks of cancer cell metabolism are potential therapeutic targets, not only to eliminate malignant cells but also to boost the efficacy of immunotherapy. In this sense, integrating the targeting of tumour metabolism into immunotherapy design seems a rational approach to improve the therapeutic efficacy of ICIs.

The addition of metformin to systemic anticancer therapy in advanced or metastatic cancers: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Preclinical studies have demonstrated that metformin has anticancer properties and act in additive or synergistic way when combined with anticancer agents. We conducted this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials to evaluate the effect of metformin added to systemic anticancer therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer. A computerized systematic electronic search was performed using PubMed, PMC, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases (up to June 2020). From nine randomized clinical trials, 821 patients were included in the pooled analyses of odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for overall response rate (ORR) and hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The concomitant use of metformin with systemic anticancer therapy did not increase tumor response (the pooled OR of ORR = 1.23, 95% CI: 0.89-1.71, p = 0.21), compared with anticancer therapy alone. In terms of survival, metformin added to anticancer agents failed to prolong PFS (HR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.75-1.21, p = 0.68) and OS (HR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.80-1.16, p = 0.71). In conclusion, this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials indicates that the addition of metformin to systemic anticancer therapy has no clinical benefits in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer.

Clinical outcomes in non-small-cell lung cancer patients receiving concurrent metformin and immune checkpoint inhibitors

Aim:

To study the clinical benefits of concurrent metformin and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in non-small-cell lung cancer patients.

Materials & methods:

This is a retrospective review of 50 non-small-cell lung cancer patients receiving ICIs with metformin (cohort A) or without metformin (cohort B). Patients were also stratified by ICIs as second-/third-line therapy.

Results:

Overall response rate and disease control rate were higher in cohort A (41.1 vs 30.7%, p = 0.4 and 70.5 vs 61.6%, p = 0.5, respectively). Median overall survival and progression-free survival were also higher in cohort A (11.5 vs 7.6 months, p = 0.5 and 4.0 vs 3.0 months, p = 0.6, respectively). On subset analysis (second-/third-line ICIs), overall response rate, disease control rate, median overall survival, progression-free survival were also higher in cohort A.

Conclusion:

Despite the small-sample size, we observed improved clinical outcomes in patients who received ICIs in combination with metformin.

Metformin-induced anticancer activities: recent insights

Metformin is a widely used antidiabetic drug, and there is evidence among diabetic patients that metformin is a chemopreventive agent against multiple cancers. There is also evidence in human studies that metformin is a cancer chemotherapeutic agent, and several clinical trials that use metformin alone or in combination with other drugs are ongoing. In vivo and in vitro cancer cell culture studies demonstrate that metformin induces both AMPK-dependent and AMPK-independent genes/pathways that result in inhibition of cancer cell growth and migration and induction of apoptosis. The effects of metformin in cancer cells resemble the patterns observed after treatment with drugs that downregulate specificity protein 1 (Sp1), Sp3 and Sp4 or by knockdown of Sp1, Sp3 and Sp4 by RNA interference. Studies in pancreatic cancer cells clearly demonstrate that metformin decreases expression of Sp1, Sp3, Sp4 and pro-oncogenic Sp-regulated genes, demonstrating that one of the underlying mechanisms of action of metformin as an anticancer agent involves targeting of Sp transcription factors. These observations are consistent with metformin-mediated effects on genes/pathways in many other tumor types.

Repurposing old drugs in oncology: Opportunities with clinical and regulatory challenges ahead

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

In order to expedite the availability of drugs to treat cancers in a cost-effective manner, repurposing of old drugs for oncological indications is gathering momentum. Revolutionary advances in pharmacology and genomics have demonstrated many old drugs to have activity at novel antioncogenic pharmacological targets. We decided to investigate whether prospective studies support the promises of nonclinical and retrospective clinical studies on repurposing three old drugs, namely metformin, valproate and astemizole.

METHODS

We conducted an extensive literature search through PubMed to gather representative nonclinical and retrospective clinical studies that investigated the potential repurposing of these three drugs for oncological indications. We then searched for prospective studies aimed at confirming the promises of retrospective data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

While evidence from nonclinical and retrospective clinical studies with these drugs appears highly promising, large scale prospective studies are either lacking or have failed to substantiate this promise. We provide a brief discussion of some of the challenges in repurposing. Principal challenges and obstacles relate to heterogeneity of cancers studied without considering their molecular signatures, trials with small sample size and short duration, failure consider issues of ethnicity of study population and effective antioncogenic doses of the drug studied.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Well-designed prospective studies demonstrating efficacy are required for repurposing old drugs for oncology indications, just as they are for new chemical entities for any indication. Early and ongoing interactions with regulatory authorities are invaluable. We outline a tentative framework for a structured approach to repurposing old drugs for novel indications in oncology.

Drug Repurposing of Metabolic Agents in Malignant Glioma

Gliomas are highly invasive brain tumors with short patient survival. One major pathogenic factor is aberrant tumor metabolism, which may be targeted with different specific and unspecific agents. Drug repurposing is of increasing interest in glioma research. Drugs interfering with the patient’s metabolism may also influence glioma metabolism. In this review, we outline definitions and methods for drug repurposing. Furthermore, we give insights into important candidates for a metabolic drug repurposing, namely metformin, statins, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, disulfiram and lonidamine. Advantages and pitfalls of drug repurposing will finally be discussed.

Metformin and blood cancers

Type 2 diabetes mellitus and cancer are correlated with changes in insulin signaling, a pathway that is frequently upregulated in neoplastic tissue but impaired in tissues that are classically targeted by insulin in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Many antidiabetes treatments, particularly metformin, enhance insulin signaling, but this pathway can be inhibited by specific cancer treatments. The modulation of cancer growth by metformin and of insulin sensitivity by anticancer drugs is so common that this phenomenon is being studied in hundreds of clinical trials on cancer. Many meta-analyses have consistently shown a moderate but direct effect of body mass index on the incidence of multiple myeloma and lymphoma and the elevated risk of leukemia in adults. Moreover, new epidemiological and preclinical studies indicate metformin as a therapeutic agent in patients with leukemia, lymphomas, and multiple myeloma. In this article, we review current findings on the anticancer activities of metformin and the underlying mechanisms from preclinical and ongoing studies in hematologic malignancies.

Metformin in cancer

Metformin is a lipophilic biguanide which inhibits hepatic gluconeogenesis and improves peripheral utilization of glucose. It is the first line pharmacotherapy for glucose control in patients with Type 2 diabetes due to its safety, efficacy and tolerability. Metformin exhibits pleotropic effects, which may have beneficial effects on a variety of tissues independent of glucose control. A potential anti-tumourigenic effect of metformin may be mediated by its role in activating AMP-kinase, which in turn inhibits mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR). Non-AMPK dependent protective pathways may include reduction of insulin, insulin-like growth factor-1, leptin, inflammatory pathways and potentiation of adiponectin, all of which may have a role in tumourigenesis. A role in inhibiting cancer stem cells is also postulated. A number of large scale observational and cohort studies suggest metformin is associated with a reduced risk of a number of cancers, although the data is not conclusive. Recent randomised studies reporting use of metformin in treatment of cancer have revealed mixed results, and the results of much larger randomised trials of metformin as an adjuvant therapy in breast and colorectal cancers are awaited.

The prognostic value of metformin for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The prognostic value of Metformin for concurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has been controversial in previous individual studies and meta-analyses. In order to further investigate the value of this medication, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis for patients with advanced or inoperable NSCLC.

Methods

We searched articles from PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science databases; the time interval was from the inception date of the databases to 1 September 2017. Inclusion criteria for eligible studies were: advanced or inoperable NSCLC; Metformin as an experimental group, and non-Metformin usage as a control group; progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) as the outcome, with available hazard ratio (HR). Data synthesis was conducted based on the random-effect model.

Results

From a total of 97 articles in databases, we included seven eligible studies. Among them, only one study compared Metformin usage and non-Metformin usage for NSCLC patients who didn't have diabetes mellitus (DM): no significant difference was found in either OS or PFS. The remaining six studies compared Metformin usage and non-Metformin usage for patients with concurrent NSCLC and DM: according to meta-analysis, significantly prolonged OS was found in Metformin usage rather than non-Metformin usage [pooled HR =0.87 (0.77-0.99), P=0.04]; no significant difference was indicated in PFS [pooled HR =0.85 (0.67-1.07), P=0.16]. In subgroup analysis, among patients with late-stage NSCLC and DM, significant difference was found, regardless of OS [pooled HR =0.81 (0.70-0.94), P<0.01] or PFS [pooled HR =0.71 (0.58-0.88), P<0.01]. However, among patients with local advanced NSCLC and DM, there was no significant difference [OS: pooled HR =1.05 (0.79-1.40), P=0.74; PFS: pooled HR =0.94 (0.68-1.32), P=0.74].

Conclusions

The prognostic value of Metformin for concurrent late-stage NSCLC and DM was demonstrated. It deserves further confirmation and explanation.

Metformin suppresses melanoma progression by inhibiting KAT5-mediated SMAD3 acetylation, transcriptional activity and TRIB3 expression

Metformin has beneficial effects of preventing and treating cancers on type 2 diabetic patients. However, the role of metformin in non-diabetic cancer patients and the precise molecular mechanisms against cancer have not yet been sufficiently elucidated. We recently reported that the pseudokinase protein TRIB3 acts as a stress sensor linking metabolic stressors to cancer promotion by inhibiting autophagy and ubiquitin-proteasomal degradation systems; genetically abrogating of TRIB3 expression reduces tumourigenesis and cancer progression. Thus, TRIB3 is a potential therapeutic target for diverse cancers. In this study, we found that metformin attenuates melanoma growth and metastasis by reducing TRIB3 expression in non-diabetic C57BL/6 mice and diabetic KK-Ay mice; overexpression of TRIB3 protects metformin from the activation of autophagic flux, the clearance of accumulated tumour-promoting factors and the attenuation of tumour progression. We further elucidated that TRIB3 acts as an adaptor to recruit lysine acetyltransferase 5 (KAT5) to SMAD3 and induce a phosphorylation-dependent K333 acetylation of SMAD3, which sustains transcriptional activity of SMAD3 and subsequently enhances TRIB3 transcription. Metformin suppresses SMAD3 phosphorylation and decreases the KAT5/SMAD3 interaction, to attenuate the KAT5-mediated K333 acetylation of SMAD3, reduce the SMAD3 transcriptional activity and subsequent TRIB3 expression, thereby antagonizes melanoma progression. Together, our study not only defines a molecular mechanism by which metformin protects against melanoma progression by disturbing the KAT5/TRIB3/SMAD3 positive feedback loop in diabetes and non-diabetes mice, but also suggests a candidate diverse utility of metformin in tumour prevention and therapy because of suppressing stress protein TRIB3 expression.

Metformin for non-small cell lung cancer patients: Opportunities and pitfalls

Despite exciting advances of the anticancer armamentarium in the recent years, mortality of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains high and novel treatments are requisite. Therapy intensification is explored with promising, but expensive and potentially toxic new compounds. Repositioning already existing drugs for cancer treatment could save money and improve patient outcomes in specific contexts. Observational data suggest that use of the standard antidiabetic agent metformin decreases lung cancer incidence and mortality. Several basic researches have shown various anticancer effects of metformin, acting both on the glycolytic metabolism and on the tumoral immune microenvironment. Synergistic actions of metformin with antitumoral agents in preclinical NSCLC models have then been highlighted. Recent retrospective studies advocated improved outcomes in NSCLC diabetic patients receiving metformin with chemoradiotherapy or systemic compounds (including conventional platinum-based chemotherapy and EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors). Several prospective randomized trials are therefore currently assessing the addition of metformin to standard therapy in non-diabetic lung cancer patients. This article reviews promises and possible limitations of concurrent metformin used as an anticancer agent in NSCLC patients.

A Randomized Phase II Study of Metformin plus Paclitaxel/Carboplatin/Bevacizumab in Patients with Chemotherapy‐Naïve Advanced or Metastatic Nonsquamous Non‐Small Cell Lung Cancer

Retrospective clinical data and laboratory studies point to metformin having a potential role in cancer treatment; however, the efficacy of this drug in cancer treatment therapy has not been validated in prospective trials. In particular, limited data evaluating the effects of metformin in lung cancer has been available. Responding to this need, a prospective phase II clinical trial was conducted, and this article evaluates response rate and progression‐free survival of platinum‐based doublet chemotherapy with or without metformin in chemotherapy‐naïive advanced or metastatic nonsquamous non‐small cell lung cancer.

Background.

In the absence of a targeted oncogenic driver mutation or high programmed death‐ligand 1 expression, systemic therapy with platinum‐based doublet chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab has been the standard treatment in advanced or metastatic non‐small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Metformin has been shown to have antitumor effects via a variety of insulin‐dependent and insulin‐independent mechanisms and to be potentially synergistic with chemotherapy.

Materials and Methods.

This open‐label single‐center phase II study (NCT01578551) enrolled patients with chemotherapy‐naïve advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC and randomized them (3:1) to receive carboplatin, paclitaxel, and bevacizumab with (Arm A) or without (Arm B) concurrent metformin for four to six cycles followed by maintenance therapy with bevacizumab ± metformin continued until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or study withdrawal. The primary outcome was 1‐year progression free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes included overall survival, response to therapy, and toxicity.

Results.

A total of 25 patients were enrolled from August 2012 to April 2015, of whom 24 received at least one cycle of therapy administration. The study was stopped early due to slow accrual and changes in standard first‐line therapy of advanced NSCLC. The 1‐year PFS on Arm A (n = 18) was 47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 25%–88%), which exceeded the historical control 1‐year PFS of 15%. Median overall survival of patients treated on Arm A was 15.9 months (95% CI: 8.4–not available [NA]) and 13.9 months (95% CI: 12.7–NA) on Arm B. There were no significant differences in toxicity between the study arms.

Conclusion.

To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to show a significant benefit in PFS with the use of metformin in this patient population and is a signal of efficacy for metformin in advanced NSCLC.

Implications for Practice.

The anticancer effects of metformin continue to be elucidated. To the authors' knowledge, this is the first trial in nondiabetic advanced non‐small cell lung cancer patients to show a significant change in outcome with the addition of metformin to standard first‐line chemotherapy. Well tolerated and widely available, metformin is a drug that should be considered for further study in the lung cancer treatment landscape.

Survival benefit associated with metformin use in inoperable non-small cell lung cancer patients with diabetes: A population-based retrospective cohort study

Objective

To evaluate the effects of metformin use on the survival of inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients with diabetes using the Taiwanese National Health Insurance Research Database.

Research design and methods

In total, 7,620 patients were eligible in this study, among them, 3,578 patients were metformin users and 4,042 were non-users. Propensity score matching was used to reduce possible confounding factors. In total, 4,182 patients (2,091 matched pairs) were included in the matched cohort. Cox proportional hazard model with time-dependent covariate were also applied to evaluate the association between metformin use and overall survival (OS).

Results

A total of 3,578 patients were metformin users at the time of diagnosis of NSCLC. Cox proportional hazard model with time-dependent covariate revealed that metformin use was associated with a significantly longer OS (HR: 0.85, 95.0% CI: 0.80–0.90). The survival benefit of metformin use was maintained after propensity score matching at a ratio of 1:1 (HR: 0.90, 95.0% CI: 0.84–0.97).

Conclusions

Metformin use is associated with longer OS in inoperable NSCLC patients with diabetes, suggesting a potential anti-tumorigenic effect for metformin. Further research is needed to investigate the actual role of metformin in the treatment of NSCLC patients with diabetes.

Metformin therapy associated with survival benefit in lung cancer patients with diabetes. Oncotarget. 2016;7:35437-35445. [PMID: 27105507 PMCID: PMC5085241 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.8881]

The purpose of this study is to summarize the currently available evidence regarding the concerned issue by performing a comprehensive meta-analysis. Relevant publications reporting the association of metformin use with survival of lung cancer patients with diabetes were electronically searched to identify eligible studies. The meta-analysis was performed with hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) as effect measures for disease-free survival(DFS) and overall survival(OS) estimates. A total of 17 individual studies from 10 publications were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, the results revealed a significant association of metformin use with a better survival of lung cancer patients with diabetes(for DFS: HR = 0.65, 95%CI = 0.52-0.83; for OS: HR = 0.78, 95%CI = 0.64-0.93). The subgroup analyses showed similar association in Asian region(for DFS:HR = 0.69, 95%CI = 0.59-0.80; for OS: HR = 0.55, 95%CI = 0.46-0.67) but not in Western region. Such association was also presented in small cell lung cancer (for DFS: HR = 0.54, 95%CI = 0.38-0.77; for OS: HR = 0.52, 95%CI = 0.39-0.69) and in non-small cell lung cancer(for DFS: HR = 0.70, 95%CI = 0.51-0.96; for OS: HR = 0.75, 95%CI = 0.58-0.97). Analyses stratified by treatment strategy showed a reduction in the risk of cancer-related mortality in patients receiving chemotherapy(for DFS: HR = 0.71, 95%CI = 0.64-0.83; for OS: HR = 0.58, 95%CI = 0.47-0.71) but not in patients receiving chemoradiotherapy. The meta-analysis demonstrated that metformin use was significantly associated with a favorable survival outcome of lung cancer patients with diabetes.

The expanding role of metformin in cancer: an update on antitumor mechanisms and clinical development

Metformin has been used for nearly a century to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus. Epidemiologic studies first identified the association between metformin and reduced risk of several cancers. The anticancer mechanisms of metformin involve both indirect or insulin-dependent pathways and direct or insulin-independent pathways. Preclinical studies have demonstrated metformin's broad anticancer activity across a spectrum of malignancies. Prospective clinical trials involving metformin in the chemoprevention and treatment of cancer now number in the hundreds. We provide an update on the anticancer mechanisms of metformin and review the results thus far available from prospective clinical trials investigating metformin's efficacy in cancer.

The Clinical Effect of Metformin on the Survival of Lung Cancer Patients with Diabetes: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Retrospective Studies

Preclinical investigations have revealed an anti-cancer effect of metformin. Several studies of metformin treatment have demonstrated the improved clinical outcomes of lung cancer patients with diabetes; however, the results have been inconsistent among studies. Our systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the up-to-date effects of metformin on diabetic lung cancer patients. A systematic search was performed for studies published. Then, these studies were evaluated for inclusion, and relevant data was extracted. The summary risk estimates for the associations of metformin treatment with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were analyzed using random/fixed-effects models. Analyses stratified by histological type were also conducted. Based on the 10 studies included in our analysis, metformin treatment was found to significantly improve survival, corresponding to reductions of 23% and 47% in OS [hazard ratio (HR)=0.77, 95% confidence interval (95%CI)=0.66-0.9, p=0.001] and PFS (HR=0.53, 95%CI=0.41-0.68, p<0.001), respectively. In addition, significant improvements in the OS for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (HR=0.77, 95%CI=0.71-0.84, p=0.002) and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (HR=0.52, 95%CI=0.29-0.91, p=0.022) were observed in association with metformin treatment in analysis stratified by histological type. This stratified analysis also revealed a significant improvement in PFS for both NSCLC (HR=0.53, 95%CI=0.39-0.71, p<0.001) and SCLC (HR=0.54, 95%CI=0.34-0.84, p=0.007). We found that metformin treatment significantly improved the OS and PFS of diabetic lung cancer patients, and our findings suggest that metformin might be an effective treatment option for diabetic patients with lung cancer.

The effect of metformin on survival of patients with pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis. Sci Rep. 2017;7:5825. [PMID: 28724893 PMCID: PMC5517652 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-06207-x]

We conducted a meta-analysis to analyse the effect of metformin on survival of pancreatic cancer patients at various stages. We performed a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science to identify all relevant studies. Summary hazard ratios (HR) of survival and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were calculated with a fixed or random effects model according to inter-study heterogeneity. Nine retrospective cohort studies and two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were eligible. There was a significant improvement in survival (HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.76–0.97; P < 0.05) in the metformin group compared with control. Subgroup analysis indicated that metformin improved survival in patients with resection (HR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.69–0.91; P < 0.05) and patients with locally advanced tumors (HR = 0.68, 95% CI 0.55–0.84; P < 0.05) but not in patients with metastatic tumors, even when RCT data were included (HR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.70–1.40; P > 0.05), or were excluded (HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.61–1.31; P > 0.05). This meta-analysis indicated that the effect of metformin does correlate with tumor stage but should be prudently considered given the limited and variable studies performed to data.

Metformin and Prostate Cancer: a New Role for an Old Drug

Purpose of Review

Since epidemiological studies first demonstrated a potential positive effect of metformin in reducing cancer incidence and mortality, there has been an increased interest in not only better understanding metformin’s mechanisms of action but also in exploring its potential anti-cancer effects. In this review, we aim to summarise the current evidence exploring a role for metformin in prostate cancer therapy.

Recent Findings

Preclinical studies have demonstrated a number of antineoplastic biological effects via a range of molecular mechanisms. Data from retrospective epidemiological studies in prostate cancer has been mixed; however, there are several clinical trials currently underway evaluating metformin’s role as an anti-cancer agent. Early studies have shown benefits of metformin to inhibit cancer cell proliferation and improve metabolic syndrome in prostate cancer patients receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

Summary

While the body of evidence to support a role for metformin in prostate cancer therapy is rapidly growing, there is still insufficient data from randomised trials, which are currently still ongoing. However, evidence so far suggests metformin could be a useful adjuvant agent, particularly in patients on ADT.

Metformin in Lung Cancer: Review of in Vitro and in Vivo Animal Studies

Cancer cells display enhanced growth rates and a resistance to apoptosis. The ability of cancer cells to evade homeostasis and proliferate uncontrollably while avoiding programmed cell death/apoptosis is acquired through mutations to key signaling molecules, which regulate pathways involved in cell proliferation and survival and these mutations allow them to develop resistance to many chemotherapeutic agents, highlighting the need for development of new potent anti-cancer agents. Metformin has long been used as a treatment for type 2 diabetes and has recently attracted attention as a potential agent to be used in the treatment of cancer. The present review summarizes the existing in vitro and in vivo animal studies focusing on the anti-lung cancer effects of metformin and its effects on key proliferative and anti-apoptotic signaling pathways.

Caloric restriction - A promising anti-cancer approach: From molecular mechanisms to clinical trials

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide and the morbidity is growing in developed countries. According to WHO, >14 million people per year are diagnosed with cancer and about 8 million die. Anti-cancer strategy includes chemo-, immune- and radiotherapy or their combination. Unfortunately, these widely used strategies often have insufficient efficacy and significant toxic effects on healthy cells. Consequently, the improvement of treatment approaches is an important goal. One of promising schemes to enhance the effect of therapy is the restriction of calorie intake or some nutrients. The combination of caloric restriction or its chemical mimetics along with anti-cancer drugs may suppress growth of tumor cells and enhance death of cancer cells. That will allow the dose of therapeutic drugs to be decreased and their toxic effects to be reduced. Here the possibility of using this combinatory therapy as well as the molecular mechanisms underlying this approach will be discussed.