Comment on: Suissa and Azoulay. Metformin and the Risk of Cancer: Time-Related Biases in Observational Studies. Diabetes Care 2012;35:2665–2673
Abstract
In a recent article in Diabetes Care , Suissa and Azoulay (1) concluded that the impressive results of the metformin-associated reduced cancer risk were due to many researchers failing to adjust for immortal time bias and not using time-dependent analysis of drug exposure. However, this conclusion is not justified since it remains controversial whether immortal time would introduce substantial bias.
We used statins and their effect on cardiovascular disease (CVD) to illustrate how different analyses could yield different results in pharmacoepidemiological studies. In a time-fixed Cox model, statin use was associated with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.66 (95% CI 0.50–0.88) for CVD, an effect size similar to that in randomized trials despite 48% of the total follow-up time in the statin users being immortal time (i.e., without drug exposure). Herein, immortal time …
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design.
Read the paper
Related studies
- Metformin as an adjuvant in breast cancer treatment
- Metformin Lysosomal Targeting: A Novel Aspect to Be Investigated for Metformin Repurposing in Neurodegenerative Diseases?
- Aberrant HSF1 signaling activation underlies metformin amelioration of myocardial infarction in mice
- Metformin induces ZFP36 by mTORC1 inhibition in cervical cancer-derived cell lines
- Protein Interaction Network for Identifying Vascular Response of Metformin (Oral Antidiabetic)
- Preventing Long COVID With Metformin
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.