↓ Skip to main content

Thiazolidinediones and cancer: results of a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Diabetologica, July 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
99 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Thiazolidinediones and cancer: results of a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials
Published in
Acta Diabetologica, July 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00592-013-0504-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Matteo Monami, Ilaria Dicembrini, Edoardo Mannucci

Abstract

Recent epidemiological data have contributed to the formulation of the hypothesis about the long-term safety of pioglitazone, a thiazolidinedione (TZD), with respect to malignancies, in particular bladder cancer. The primary aim of this meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials, not designed a priori to test this hypothesis, was to explore whether TZDs affect the risk of cancer. A meta-analysis was performed including published and unpublished randomized trials with a duration of at least 52 weeks, enrolling patients with or without diabetes, comparing TZDs with either placebo or other drug therapies on various different outcomes. We found 22 trials reporting at least one cancer and enrolling 13,197 patients to TZD (pioglitazone: n = 3,710 and rosiglitazone: n = 9,487) and 12,359 to placebo or active comparator groups. The mean follow-up was 26.1 months. Overall, those assigned at random to TZDs had a significant reduction (MH-OR 0.85 [0.73-0.98]; p = 0.027) in the incidence of malignancies, with no significant difference in effect between pioglitazone and rosiglitazone. Specifically, subgroup analyses showed a significant reduction for rosiglitazone (MH-OR 0.82 [0.69-0.98]; p = 0.029), but not for pioglitazone (MH-OR 0.66 [0.34-1.28]; p = 0.22). In further subgroup analyses of site-specific malignancies based on the data from four trials, the risk of bladder cancer with pioglitazone (MH-OR) was 2.05 [0.84-5.02]; p = 0.12. Further, rosiglitazone, but not pioglitazone, was associated with a significantly reduced risk of bowel cancer. In contrast, pioglitazone, but not rosiglitazone, was associated with a significant reduction in breast cancer. The present meta-analysis of trials, not designed a priori to test the hypothesis, provides reassuring evidence that TZDs are not associated with risk of overall malignancies. In fact, they are compatible with the possibility of a decreased risk of cancer. In site-specific subgroup analyses, for rosiglitazone, there was a significant decreased risk of bowel cancer. Subgroup analyses for pioglitazone did not allow to exclude an increased risk of bladder cancer, while the risk of breast cancer was significantly decreased. While these data are also useful to formulate not test hypotheses, they provide somewhat more cogent evidence than the previously published epidemiological data.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Ecuador 1 1%
Saudi Arabia 1 1%
Unknown 70 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 14 19%
Student > Bachelor 9 13%
Other 9 13%
Student > Master 9 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 13 18%
Unknown 13 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 38%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 6%
Other 10 14%
Unknown 18 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 November 2013.
All research outputs
#20,209,145
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Acta Diabetologica
#720
of 889 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#170,638
of 194,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Diabetologica
#6
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 889 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 194,459 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.