4.1 Article

Differential Risk of Cancer Associated with Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists: Analysis of Real-world Databases

期刊

ENDOCRINE RESEARCH
卷 47, 期 1, 页码 18-25

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/07435800.2021.1955255

关键词

GLP1 receptor agonist; prostate cancer; colon cancer; lung cancer; thyroid cancer

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that GLP1Ra users have a lower risk of prostate, lung, and colon cancer, but a higher risk of thyroid cancer. Additionally, with longer duration of GLP1Ra use, the risk of prostate, lung, and colon cancer further decreased.
Background Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1Ra) are commonly used in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, differential risk of various cancers among GLP1Ra recipients is unknown. Methods We inquired an aggregated electronic health record database, Explorys, and compared the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of cancers between GLP1Ra and metformin users. Findings were validated in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FDA FAERS). Results From 1/2005 to 6/2019, we identified 619 340 and 64 230 patients in the metformin and GLP1Ra group, respectively. Within 5 years of starting antidiabetic medications, GLP1Ra was associated with significantly lower incident risk of prostate (aOR 0.81, p = .03), lung (aOR 0.81, p = .05), and colon cancer (aOR 0.85, p = .03), while the risk of thyroid cancer was significantly higher (aOR 1.65, p < .01). Similar findings were seen in the FDA FAERS database, where GLP1Ra was associated with lower risk of prostate (aOR 0.72, p = .08), lung (aOR 0.52, p < .01), colon cancer (aOR 0.82, p = .31), and higher risk of thyroid cancer (aOR 4.33, p < .01). In addition, with longer duration of GLP1Ra use, the risk of prostate, lung, and colon cancer further decreased, suggesting an exposure duration-response relationship. Conclusions GLP1Ra is associated with lower risks of prostate, lung, and colon cancer, but higher risk of thyroid cancer.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据