Evidence Hub

Diabetes is associated with elevated mortality, stroke, and osteoradionecrosis in squamous cell carcinomas of the head and neck: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Bencze B, Cavalcante BGN, Róna V, Szabó B, Wenning AS, Hermann P, Varga G, Németh O et al.

BMC oral health, 2026

138,000 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Background: Diabetes mellitus has been associated with an increased incidence and potentially with a worse prognosis of squamous cell carcinomas due to chronic inflammation, oxidative stress, and metabolic reprogramming, which promote tumor growth and therapy resistance. Furthermore, it impairs immune response and posttreatment healing, potentially leading to higher complication rates.

Methods: The study protocol was preregistered (CRD42025634653). An electronic search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane. Studies on patients with squamous cell carcinomas were included to compare survival metrics and complication rates with and without diabetes. Hazard ratios, odds ratios, and mean differences were extracted. A random-effects model was used, with subgroups based on cancer location.

Results: 63 predominantly retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria, with a population of 138,000 individuals. The meta-analysis found statistically significant differences in disease-specific (HR = 1.47 [1.11-1.96]; I2 = 60%), overall (HR = 1.31 [1.23-1.39]; I2 = 4%), and disease-free survival (HR = 1.58 [1.12-2.24]; I2 = 58%); the subgroup analysis revealed that diabetes significantly affected oral and oropharyngeal subsites. Posttreatment stroke (HR = 2.11 [1.15-3.87]; I2 = 70%) and osteoradionecrosis rates (HR = 2.2 [1.38-3.53]; I2 = 11%) were significantly elevated.

Conclusion: Diabetes is associated with worse disease-specific survival in oral and oropharyngeal subtypes and…

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. Reported size: 138,000 participants or records.

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