Evidence Hub

Risk of pancreatitis and pancreatic carcinoma for anti-diabetic medications: findings from real-world safety data analysis and systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Muhammed A, Thomas C, Kalaiselvan V, Undela K

Expert opinion on drug safety, 2024

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The existing evidence from pre- and post-marketing studies is conflicting on the risk of pancreatic events for anti-diabetic medications.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective case/non-case study was conducted by using spontaneous reports on pancreatic events for anti-diabetic medications from the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and VigiBase. Proportional Reporting Ratio (PRR), Reporting Odds Ratio (ROR), and Information Component (IC) were calculated by a disproportionality analysis. Furthermore, PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on anti-diabetic drugs with pancreatic outcomes.

RESULTS: The FAERS data analysis found strong signals on incretin mimetics causing pancreatic events, with sitagliptin having the highest risk [PRR = 24.2, lower bound (LB) ROR = 24.4, IC025 = 4.4 for pancreatitis, and PRR = 15.4, LB ROR = 14.9, IC025 = 3.8 for pancreatic carcinoma]. Empagliflozin was the most pancreatitis-risk sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor [PRR = 4.0, LB ROR = 3.5, IC025 = 1.8]. VigiBase reiterated these findings and identified some new signals for novel anti-diabetics. Meta-analysis revealed that the incidence of pancreatitis and pancreatic carcinoma with anti-diabetic medications was insignificant. However, compared to the placebo/active comparator, gliptins had a higher risk of acute pancreatitis (OR 1.44; 95% CI 1.03, 2.01; P = 0.03).

CONCLUSION:…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free