Janick Weberpals1, Lina Jansen1, Prudence R Carr1, Michael Hoffmeister1, Hermann Brenner2. 1. Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. 2. Division of Clinical Epidemiology and Aging Research, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany; Division of Preventive Oncology, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ) and National Center for Tumor Diseases (NCT), Heidelberg, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK), German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: h.brenner@dkfz.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Findings from experimental and observational studies have suggested beneficial effects of beta blocker (BB) use on cancer survival. Nevertheless, results have been inconclusive and there have been concerns that the observed associations might have resulted from immortal time bias (ITB). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize existing evidence, paying particular attention to this potential source of bias. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and Web of Science. Studies investigating the association between BB use and overall or cancer-specific survival were included. Summary estimates were derived from meta-analyses using random effects models. The potential influence of ITB was investigated. RESULTS: We identified 30 eligible studies including 88,026 cancer patients in total. We deemed 11 studies to be at high or unclear risk of ITB. Including all studies in the meta-analysis, BB users had a significantly better overall (hazard ratio (HR) 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.97) and cancer-specific (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.88) survival. Excluding the studies deemed to be prone to ITB resulted in HRs (95% CIs) of 1.00 (0.93-1.07) and 0.90 (0.83-0.98), respectively. Analyses on cancer site and BB type did not show beneficial associations besides overall survival among melanoma patients. However, melanoma-specific survival was not improved. CONCLUSION: We found no clinically meaningful evidence for an association between BB use and survival after excluding studies with a possible ITB. Our results support suggestions that the proposed beneficial effect of BBs on cancer survival might be based on ITB.
BACKGROUND: Findings from experimental and observational studies have suggested beneficial effects of beta blocker (BB) use on cancer survival. Nevertheless, results have been inconclusive and there have been concerns that the observed associations might have resulted from immortal time bias (ITB). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize existing evidence, paying particular attention to this potential source of bias. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed and Web of Science. Studies investigating the association between BB use and overall or cancer-specific survival were included. Summary estimates were derived from meta-analyses using random effects models. The potential influence of ITB was investigated. RESULTS: We identified 30 eligible studies including 88,026 cancerpatients in total. We deemed 11 studies to be at high or unclear risk of ITB. Including all studies in the meta-analysis, BB users had a significantly better overall (hazard ratio (HR) 0.88, 95% CI 0.79-0.97) and cancer-specific (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.88) survival. Excluding the studies deemed to be prone to ITB resulted in HRs (95% CIs) of 1.00 (0.93-1.07) and 0.90 (0.83-0.98), respectively. Analyses on cancer site and BB type did not show beneficial associations besides overall survival among melanomapatients. However, melanoma-specific survival was not improved. CONCLUSION: We found no clinically meaningful evidence for an association between BB use and survival after excluding studies with a possible ITB. Our results support suggestions that the proposed beneficial effect of BBs on cancer survival might be based on ITB.
Authors: Seungkirl Ahn; Alem W Kahsai; Biswaranjan Pani; Qin-Ting Wang; Shuai Zhao; Alissa L Wall; Ryan T Strachan; Dean P Staus; Laura M Wingler; Lillian D Sun; Justine Sinnaeve; Minjung Choi; Ted Cho; Thomas T Xu; Gwenn M Hansen; Michael B Burnett; Jane E Lamerdin; Daniel L Bassoni; Bryant J Gavino; Gitte Husemoen; Eva K Olsen; Thomas Franch; Stefano Costanzi; Xin Chen; Robert J Lefkowitz Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2017-01-27 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Anne Kreklau; Ivonne Nel; Sabine Kasimir-Bauer; Rainer Kimmig; Anna Christina Frackenpohl; Bahriye Aktas Journal: In Vivo Date: 2021 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.155