Advertisement

Pioglitazone use and risk of bladder cancer: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of observational studies

  • Juha Mehtälä
  • Houssem Khanfir
  • Dimitri Bennett
  • Yizhou Ye
  • Pasi Korhonen
  • Fabian Hoti
Original Article
  • 140 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Studies investigating bladder cancer risk in pioglitazone-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus patients report conflicting results. Previous meta-analyses on this topic utilized publications prior to 2013. More long-term observational studies have been published since then. We reviewed the accumulated evidence and updated findings from previous meta-analyses.

Methods

This meta-analysis was based on a systematic review of peer-reviewed observational studies published prior to September 30, 2016. Eligible studies were identified using a specified MEDLINE search. References from included studies and from previous meta-analyses were screened for additional records. Meta-analysis hazards ratios were derived using a random-effects model. Several sensitivity analyses including hierarchical Bayesian meta-analysis with country-specific effects were conducted.

Results

Of 363 identified records, 23 studies were included in this review and 18 in the actual meta-analyses. For bladder cancer outcome, the estimated effect size for ever vs. never use of pioglitazone was 1.16 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04–1.28]. In the cumulative dose and duration analyses, highest effect was observed in the highest/longest exposure group, but substantial heterogeneity was present. In the sensitivity analysis, only studies adjusted for lifestyle-related factors were included and the frequentist effect size was 1.18 (95% CI, 1.00–1.40, p = 0.054). However, the risk was not verified in the Bayesian framework with an effect size of 1.17 [95% credible interval (CrI), 0.94–1.54].

Conclusions

In line with previous meta-analyses, we observed a small but statistically significant association between ever (vs. never) use of pioglitazone and bladder cancer risk; however, causality is not established and alternative explanations cannot be ruled out.

Keywords

Bladder cancer Meta-analysis Pioglitazone Review Observational studies 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was sponsored by Takeda Pharmaceuticals Company Limited.

Author contributions

DB and YY conceived and designed the study and wrote a first protocol outline. JM, HK, PK, and FH critically reviewed the outline and developed a full protocol. JM, HK, PK, YY, and FH participated in the development of the literature search strategy, conducted literature search, and abstracted and compiled the data. JM, HK, PK, and FH performed the analyses. All authors participated in the discussion and interpretation of the study findings. JM, HK, PK, and FH drafted the manuscript. All authors critically reviewed, revised, and approved the final version submitted for publication.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

YY and DB are employees of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited. JM, HK, FH, and PK are employees of EPID Research Oy, which is a contract research organization that performs commissioned pharmacoepidemiologic studies, and thus its employees have been and currently are working in collaboration with several pharmaceutical companies.

Ethics approval

This systematic literature review does not involve any animal or human subjects, including research on identifiable human material and data.

Supplementary material

13340_2018_360_MOESM1_ESM.docx (767 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 766 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    World Health Organization. Global Report on Diabetes. 2016. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/204871/1/9789241565257_eng.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 23 Aug 2016.
  2. 2.
    Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report: Estimates of Diabetes and Its Burden in the United States, 2014. http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/statsreport14/national-diabetes-report-web.pdf. Accessed 23 Aug 2016.
  3. 3.
    American Diabetes Association. Economic Costs of Diabetes in the US in 2012. Diabetes Care. 2013;36:1033–46.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc12-2625.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    DeFronzo RA, Banerji M, Bray GA, et al. Actos now for the prevention of diabetes (ACT NOW) study. BMC Endocr Disord. 2009.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6823-9-17.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    DeFronzo RA, Tripathy D, Schwenke DC, et al. Pioglitazone for diabetes prevention in impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1104–15.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1010949.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kipnes MS, Krosnick A, Rendell MS, et al. Pioglitazone hydrochloride in combination with sulfonylurea therapy improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. Am J Med. 2001;111:10–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Einhorn D, Rendell M, Rosenzweig J, et al. Pioglitazone hydrochloride in combination with metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized, placebo-controlled study. The Pioglitazone 027 Study Group. Clin Ther. 2000;22:1395–409.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rosenstock J, Einhorn D, Hershon K, et al. Efficacy and safety of pioglitazone in type 2 diabetes: a randomised, placebo-controlled study in patients receiving stable insulin therapy. Int J Clin Pract. 2002;56:251–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schernthaner G, Matthews DR, Charbonnel B, et al. Efficacy and safety of pioglitazone versus metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a double-blind, Randomized Trial. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2004;89:6068–76.  https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2003-030861.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Takeda Pharmaceuticals America, Inc. Actos (Pioglitazone Hydrochloride) Tablets: Full Prescribing Information. 2009. http://www.actos.com/actospro/home.aspx. Accessed 12 Aug 2016.
  11. 11.
    Piccinni C, Motola D, Marchesini G, Poluzzi E. Assessing the association of pioglitazone use and bladder cancer through drug adverse event reporting. Diabetes Care. 2011;34(6):1369–71.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc10-2412.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lewis JD, Ferrara A, Peng T, et al. Risk of bladder cancer among diabetic patients treated with pioglitazone: interim report of a longitudinal cohort study. Diabetes Care. 2011;34:916–22.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc10-1068.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tseng C-H. Pioglitazone and bladder cancer: a population-based study of Taiwanese. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:278–80.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1449.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Neumann A, Weill A, Ricordeau P, et al. Pioglitazone and risk of bladder cancer among diabetic patients in France: a population-based cohort study. Diabetologia. 2012;55:1953–62.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-012-2538-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Azoulay L, Yin H, Filion KB, et al. The use of pioglitazone and the risk of bladder cancer in people with type 2 diabetes: nested case-control study. BMJ. 2012;344:e3645.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fujimoto K, Hamamoto Y, Honjo S, et al. Possible link of pioglitazone with bladder cancer in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2013;99:e21–3.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2012.11.013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Song SO, Kim KJ, Lee B-W, et al. The risk of bladder cancer in korean diabetic subjects treated with pioglitazone. Diabetes Metab J. 2012;36:371–8.  https://doi.org/10.4093/dmj.2012.36.5.371.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Colmers IN, Bowker SL, Majumdar SR, et al. Use of thiazolidinediones and the risk of bladder cancer among people with type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis. CMAJ Can Med Assoc J J Assoc Medicale Can. 2012;184:E675–83.  https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.112102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bosetti C, Rosato V, Buniato D, et al. Cancer risk for patients using thiazolidinediones for type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis. Oncologist. 2013;18:148–56.  https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0302.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ferwana M, Firwana B, Hasan R, et al. Pioglitazone and risk of bladder cancer: a meta-analysis of controlled studies. Diabet Med. 2013;30:1026–32.  https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.12144.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Turner RM, Kwok CS, Chen-Turner C, et al. Thiazolidinediones and associated risk of bladder cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis: thiazolidinediones and bladder cancer. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2014;78:258–73.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.12306.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhu Z, Shen Z, Lu Y, et al. Increased risk of bladder cancer with pioglitazone therapy in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2012;98:159–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diabres.2012.05.006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    He S, Tang Y, Zhao G, et al. Pioglitazone prescription increases risk of bladder cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes: an updated meta-analysis. Tumour Biol J Int Soc Oncodevelopmental Biol Med. 2014;35:2095–102.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13277-013-1278-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Levin D, Bell S, Sund R, et al. Pioglitazone and bladder cancer risk: a multipopulation pooled, cumulative exposure analysis. Diabetologia. 2015;58:493–504.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-014-3456-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lewis JD, Habel LA, Quesenberry CP, et al. Pioglitazone use and risk of bladder cancer and other common cancers in persons with diabetes. JAMA. 2015;314:265.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2015.7996.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tuccori M, Filion KB, Yin H, et al. Pioglitazone use and risk of bladder cancer: population based cohort study. BMJ. 2016;352:i1541.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Korhonen P, Heintjes EM, Williams R, et al. Pioglitazone use and risk of bladder cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes: retrospective cohort study using datasets from four European countries. BMJ. 2016.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i3903.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    von Hippel PT. The heterogeneity statistic I 2 can be biased in small meta-analyses. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-015-0024-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Higgins JPT, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2002;21:1539–58.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1186.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Higgins JPT. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557–60.  https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7414.557.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sterne JA, Egger M. Funnel plots for detecting bias in meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:1046–55.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00377-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50:1088–101.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–34.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Jin S-M, Song SO, Jung CH, et al. Risk of bladder cancer among patients with diabetes treated with a 15 mg pioglitazone dose in Korea: a multi-center retrospective cohort study. J Korean Med Sci. 2014;29:238.  https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2014.29.2.238.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hsiao F-Y, Hsieh P-H, Huang W-F, et al. Risk of bladder cancer in diabetic patients treated with rosiglitazone or pioglitazone: a nested case-control study. Drug Saf. 2013;36:643–9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-013-0080-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Mackenzie TA, Zaha R, Smith J, et al. Diabetes pharmacotherapies and bladder cancer: a medicare epidemiologic study. Diabetes Ther. 2016;7:61–73.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13300-016-0152-4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Shapiro S. Causation, bias and confounding: a hitchhiker’s guide to the epidemiological galaxy part 2. Principles of causality in epidemiological research: confounding, effect modification and strength of association. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2008;34:185–90.  https://doi.org/10.1783/147118908784734873.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Greco T, Zangrillo A, Biondi-Zoccai G, et al. Meta-analysis: pitfalls and hints. Heart Lung Vessels. 2013;5:219–25.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Chang C-H, Lin J-W, Wu L-C, et al. Association of thiazolidinediones with liver cancer and colorectal cancer in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Hepatology. 2012;55:1462–72.  https://doi.org/10.1002/hep.25509.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kuo H-W, Tiao M-M, Ho S-C, et al. Pioglitazone use and the risk of bladder cancer. Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2014;30:94–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjms.2013.09.011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Han E, Jang S-Y, Kim G, et al. Rosiglitazone use and the risk of bladder cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95:e2786.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000002786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Mamtani R, Haynes K, Bilker WB, et al. Association between longer therapy with thiazolidinediones and risk of bladder cancer: a cohort study. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104:1411–21.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djs328.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tseng C-H. Pioglitazone and bladder cancer: a population-based study of Taiwanese. Diabetes Care. 2012;35:278–80.  https://doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1449.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wei L, MacDonald TM, Mackenzie IS. Pioglitazone and bladder cancer: a propensity score matched cohort study. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2013;75:254–9.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04325.x.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Vallarino C, Perez A, Fusco G, et al. Comparing pioglitazone to insulin with respect to cancer, cardiovascular and bone fracture endpoints, using propensity score weights. Clin Drug Investig. 2013;33:621–31.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40261-013-0106-9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Lee M-Y, Hsiao P-J, Yang Y-H, et al. The association of pioglitazone and urinary tract disease in type 2 diabetic Taiwanese: bladder cancer and chronic kidney disease. PLoS One. 2014;9:e85479.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0085479.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Balaji V, Seshiah V, Ashtalakshmi G, et al. A retrospective study on finding correlation of pioglitazone and incidences of bladder cancer in the Indian population. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2014;18:425.  https://doi.org/10.4103/2230-8210.131223.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lewis JD, Habel L, Quesenberry C, et al. Proteinuria testing among patients with diabetes mellitus is associated with bladder cancer diagnosis: potential for unmeasured confounding in studies of pioglitazone and bladder cancer: proteinuria and bladder cancer diagnosis. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2014;23:636–45.  https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.3619.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japan Diabetes Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.EPID Research OyEspooFinland
  2. 2.Takeda Pharmaceutical Company LimitedCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations