AIM: To compare pancreatic cancer incidence and diagnostic evaluation among patients initiating dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor treatment with those initiating sulfonylureas (SU) and thiazolidinediones (TZD). METHODS: Medicare claims data were examined in a new-user active-comparator cohort study. Patients >65 years with no prescriptions for DPP-4 inhibitors, SU or TZD at baseline were included if they had at least two claims for the same drug within 180 days. Using an as-treated approach and propensity score-adjusted Cox models, we estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for pancreatic cancer. Diagnostic evaluations were compared using risk ratios. RESULTS: In the DPP-4 inhibitor versus SU comparison, there were 18 179 patients who initiated treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors, of whom 26 developed pancreatic cancer (interquartile range follow-up 5-18 months). In the DPP-4 inhibitor versus TZD comparison there were 29 366 people initiating DPP-4 inhibitor treatment and 52 of these developed pancreatic cancer. The risk of pancreatic cancer with DPP-4 inhibitor treatment was lower relative to SU treatment (HR: 0.6, CI: 0.4-0.9) and similar to TZD treatment (HR: 1.0, 95% CI: 0.7-1.4). After the first 6 months of follow-up were excluded to reduce the potential for reverse causality, the results were not altered. The probability of diagnostic evaluation after commencing DPP-4 inhibitor treatment (79.3%) was similar to that for TZD (74.1%, risk ratio 1.06, 95% CI: 1.05-1.07) and SU (74.6%) (risk ratio 1.06, 95% CI: 1.05-1.07). The probability of diagnostic evaluation before the index date (date of initiating treatment) was ∼80% for all cohorts. CONCLUSION: Although the present study was limited by sample size and the observed duration of treatment in the USA, our well-controlled population-based study suggests there is no higher short-term pancreatic cancer risk with DPP-4 inhibitor treatment relative to SU or TZD treatment.
AIM: To compare pancreatic cancer incidence and diagnostic evaluation among patients initiating dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor treatment with those initiating sulfonylureas (SU) and thiazolidinediones (TZD). METHODS: Medicare claims data were examined in a new-user active-comparator cohort study. Patients >65 years with no prescriptions for DPP-4 inhibitors, SU or TZD at baseline were included if they had at least two claims for the same drug within 180 days. Using an as-treated approach and propensity score-adjusted Cox models, we estimated the hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for pancreatic cancer. Diagnostic evaluations were compared using risk ratios. RESULTS: In the DPP-4 inhibitor versus SU comparison, there were 18 179 patients who initiated treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors, of whom 26 developed pancreatic cancer (interquartile range follow-up 5-18 months). In the DPP-4 inhibitor versus TZD comparison there were 29 366 people initiating DPP-4 inhibitor treatment and 52 of these developed pancreatic cancer. The risk of pancreatic cancer with DPP-4 inhibitor treatment was lower relative to SU treatment (HR: 0.6, CI: 0.4-0.9) and similar to TZD treatment (HR: 1.0, 95% CI: 0.7-1.4). After the first 6 months of follow-up were excluded to reduce the potential for reverse causality, the results were not altered. The probability of diagnostic evaluation after commencing DPP-4 inhibitor treatment (79.3%) was similar to that for TZD (74.1%, risk ratio 1.06, 95% CI: 1.05-1.07) and SU (74.6%) (risk ratio 1.06, 95% CI: 1.05-1.07). The probability of diagnostic evaluation before the index date (date of initiating treatment) was ∼80% for all cohorts. CONCLUSION: Although the present study was limited by sample size and the observed duration of treatment in the USA, our well-controlled population-based study suggests there is no higher short-term pancreatic cancer risk with DPP-4 inhibitor treatment relative to SU or TZD treatment.
Authors: Benjamin M Scirica; Deepak L Bhatt; Eugene Braunwald; P Gabriel Steg; Jaime Davidson; Boaz Hirshberg; Peter Ohman; Robert Frederich; Stephen D Wiviott; Elaine B Hoffman; Matthew A Cavender; Jacob A Udell; Nihar R Desai; Ofri Mosenzon; Darren K McGuire; Kausik K Ray; Lawrence A Leiter; Itamar Raz Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-09-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Shannon M Lynch; Alina Vrieling; Jay H Lubin; Peter Kraft; Julie B Mendelsohn; Patricia Hartge; Federico Canzian; Emily Steplowski; Alan A Arslan; Myron Gross; Kathy Helzlsouer; Eric J Jacobs; Andrea LaCroix; Gloria Petersen; Wei Zheng; Demetrius Albanes; Laufey Amundadottir; Sheila A Bingham; Paolo Boffetta; Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault; Stephen J Chanock; Sandra Clipp; Robert N Hoover; Kevin Jacobs; Karen C Johnson; Charles Kooperberg; Juhua Luo; Catherine Messina; Domenico Palli; Alpa V Patel; Elio Riboli; Xiao-Ou Shu; Laudina Rodriguez Suarez; Gilles Thomas; Anne Tjønneland; Geoffrey S Tobias; Elissa Tong; Dimitrios Trichopoulos; Jarmo Virtamo; Weimin Ye; Kai Yu; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquette; H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita; Rachael Z Stolzenberg-Solomon Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2009-06-26 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Sonal Singh; Hsien-Yen Chang; Thomas M Richards; Jonathan P Weiner; Jeanne M Clark; Jodi B Segal Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2013-04-08 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Mugdha Gokhale; John B Buse; Michele Jonsson Funk; Jennifer Lund; Virginia Pate; Ross J Simpson; Til Stürmer Journal: Diabetes Obes Metab Date: 2017-03-17 Impact factor: 6.577
Authors: Phyo T Htoo; John B Buse; Mugdha Gokhale; M Alison Marquis; Virginia Pate; Til Stürmer Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2016-05-10 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Mugdha Gokhale; John B Buse; Virginia Pate; M Alison Marquis; Til Stürmer Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2015-09-11 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Tiansheng Wang; Jin-Liern Hong; Emily W Gower; Virginia Pate; Seema Garg; John B Buse; Til Stürmer Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2018-07-16 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Laurent Azoulay; Kristian B Filion; Robert W Platt; Matthew Dahl; Colin R Dormuth; Kristin K Clemens; Madeleine Durand; David N Juurlink; Laura E Targownik; Tanvir C Turin; J Michael Paterson; Pierre Ernst Journal: BMJ Date: 2016-02-17