Evidence Hub

Real-world evidence on the association of novel antidiabetic medication use with cancer risk and protective effects: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Kenawy AS, Liu YS, Aiyeolemi A, Okoye G, Park C

Therapeutic advances in drug safety, 2025

Abstract

Background: Novel antidiabetic medications (SGLT-2 inhibitors, DPP-4 inhibitors, and GLP-1 agonists) are commonly used worldwide; however, the available research lacks definitive conclusions on their protective effects or potential risks on cancer.

Objectives: Compared to other antidiabetics, our systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) aims to use real-world studies to assess the potential cancer risks or protective effects of these novel antidiabetics.

Methods: We comprehensively searched PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science from their inception until November 30, 2023. We included observational studies examining at least one novel antidiabetics in the systematic review. The novel antidiabetics include sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), and glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists (GLP-1a).

Design: We focused on cohort studies that provided data on cancer incidence and sample size in the NMA. Using NetMetaXL®, the random effects model with informative priors was used in the NMA to estimate the pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible intervals (CrI).

Results: The systematic review included 62 studies, of which 22 met the inclusion criteria for the NMA. SGLT-2i users had lower overall cancer risk compared to sulfonylureas (OR: 0.54; 95% CrI: 0.40-0.74, low certainty), GLP-1a (OR: 0.70; 95% CrI: 0.53-0.92, low certainty), and DPP-4i users (OR: 0.72; 95% CrI: 0.57-0.92, very low certainty). DPP-4i users also had a…

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