diabetes and cancerbendixcarstensen.com/dmca/dmca-overview.pdf · con icts of interest i employee...
TRANSCRIPT
Diabetes and Cancer
Bendix Carstensen Steno Diabetes CenterGentofte, Denmarkhttp://BendixCarstensen.com
ASCO, 12th Anuual Meeting
Chicago, June 2012
1/ 16
Conflicts of interest
I Employee of Steno Diabetes Center, a researchhospital owned by NovoNordisk.
I Stockholder of NovoNordisk.
I NovoNordisk is a major insulin and -analogmanufacturer.
2/ 16
Conflicts of interest
I Employee of Steno Diabetes Center, a researchhospital owned by NovoNordisk.
I Stockholder of NovoNordisk.
I NovoNordisk is a major insulin and -analogmanufacturer.
2/ 16
Conflicts of interest
I Employee of Steno Diabetes Center, a researchhospital owned by NovoNordisk.
I Stockholder of NovoNordisk.
I NovoNordisk is a major insulin and -analogmanufacturer.
2/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer
Two main questions:
I Do diabetes patients get cancer more oftenthan non-diabetics?— cancer incidence studies
I Do cancer patients with diabetes die earlierthan cancer patients without diabetes?— cancer survival studies
I Combination (ignoring the cancer diagnosis):Do diabetes patients die more frequently fromcancer than non-diabetics?— cancer mortality studies
3/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer
Two main questions:
I Do diabetes patients get cancer more oftenthan non-diabetics?— cancer incidence studies
I Do cancer patients with diabetes die earlierthan cancer patients without diabetes?— cancer survival studies
I Combination (ignoring the cancer diagnosis):Do diabetes patients die more frequently fromcancer than non-diabetics?— cancer mortality studies
3/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer
Two main questions:
I Do diabetes patients get cancer more oftenthan non-diabetics?— cancer incidence studies
I Do cancer patients with diabetes die earlierthan cancer patients without diabetes?— cancer survival studies
I Combination (ignoring the cancer diagnosis):Do diabetes patients die more frequently fromcancer than non-diabetics?— cancer mortality studies
3/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer
Two main questions:
I Do diabetes patients get cancer more oftenthan non-diabetics?— cancer incidence studies
I Do cancer patients with diabetes die earlierthan cancer patients without diabetes?— cancer survival studies
I Combination (ignoring the cancer diagnosis):Do diabetes patients die more frequently fromcancer than non-diabetics?— cancer mortality studies
3/ 16
This discussion
I Broader epidemiological / demographic view ofcancer incidence among diabetes patients
I Exemplified by two studies not included in PB’smetaanalysis:
I Johnson et al.:Time-varying incidence of cancer after the onset oftype 2 diabetes: evidence of potential detectionbiasDiabetologia (2011) 54:2263-2271
I Carstensen et al.:Cancer occurrence in Danish diabetic patients:duration and insulin effectsDiabetologia (2012) 55:948-958
4/ 16
This discussion
I Broader epidemiological / demographic view ofcancer incidence among diabetes patients
I Exemplified by two studies not included in PB’smetaanalysis:
I Johnson et al.:Time-varying incidence of cancer after the onset oftype 2 diabetes: evidence of potential detectionbiasDiabetologia (2011) 54:2263-2271
I Carstensen et al.:Cancer occurrence in Danish diabetic patients:duration and insulin effectsDiabetologia (2012) 55:948-958
4/ 16
This discussion
I Broader epidemiological / demographic view ofcancer incidence among diabetes patients
I Exemplified by two studies not included in PB’smetaanalysis:
I Johnson et al.:Time-varying incidence of cancer after the onset oftype 2 diabetes: evidence of potential detectionbiasDiabetologia (2011) 54:2263-2271
I Carstensen et al.:Cancer occurrence in Danish diabetic patients:duration and insulin effectsDiabetologia (2012) 55:948-958
4/ 16
This discussion
I Broader epidemiological / demographic view ofcancer incidence among diabetes patients
I Exemplified by two studies not included in PB’smetaanalysis:
I Johnson et al.:Time-varying incidence of cancer after the onset oftype 2 diabetes: evidence of potential detectionbiasDiabetologia (2011) 54:2263-2271
I Carstensen et al.:Cancer occurrence in Danish diabetic patients:duration and insulin effectsDiabetologia (2012) 55:948-958
4/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer problems
I All studies are observational
I All studies are subject to confounding byindication:
I influenced clinically by diabetes diagnosis.I influenced by decison of diabetes treatment.
I There is no remedy for this.
I Description of cancer occurrence in diabetespatients.
I Causal interpretations are pure speculation.
5/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer problems
I All studies are observational
I All studies are subject to confounding byindication:
I influenced clinically by diabetes diagnosis.I influenced by decison of diabetes treatment.
I There is no remedy for this.
I Description of cancer occurrence in diabetespatients.
I Causal interpretations are pure speculation.
5/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer problems
I All studies are observational
I All studies are subject to confounding byindication:
I influenced clinically by diabetes diagnosis.I influenced by decison of diabetes treatment.
I There is no remedy for this.
I Description of cancer occurrence in diabetespatients.
I Causal interpretations are pure speculation.
5/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer problems
I All studies are observational
I All studies are subject to confounding byindication:
I influenced clinically by diabetes diagnosis.I influenced by decison of diabetes treatment.
I There is no remedy for this.
I Description of cancer occurrence in diabetespatients.
I Causal interpretations are pure speculation.
5/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer problems
I All studies are observational
I All studies are subject to confounding byindication:
I influenced clinically by diabetes diagnosis.I influenced by decison of diabetes treatment.
I There is no remedy for this.
I Description of cancer occurrence in diabetespatients.
I Causal interpretations are pure speculation.
5/ 16
Diabetes and Cancer problems
I All studies are observational
I All studies are subject to confounding byindication:
I influenced clinically by diabetes diagnosis.I influenced by decison of diabetes treatment.
I There is no remedy for this.
I Description of cancer occurrence in diabetespatients.
I Causal interpretations are pure speculation.
5/ 16
The Danish & British Columbia studiesCarstensen et al., Diabetologia, 2012
Johnson et al., Diabetologia, 2011
I Cancer incidence study in the total population.
I Comparing diabetes patients with non-diabetespatients.
I Outcome: Rate-ratio of cancer occurrencebetween DM-patients and non-DM persons inthe entire population.
I Cancers in DM ptt: Denmark 22,826B.C. 12,438
— by far the largest studies to date.
6/ 16
The Danish & British Columbia studiesCarstensen et al., Diabetologia, 2012
Johnson et al., Diabetologia, 2011
I Cancer incidence study in the total population.
I Comparing diabetes patients with non-diabetespatients.
I Outcome: Rate-ratio of cancer occurrencebetween DM-patients and non-DM persons inthe entire population.
I Cancers in DM ptt: Denmark 22,826B.C. 12,438
— by far the largest studies to date.
6/ 16
The Danish & British Columbia studiesCarstensen et al., Diabetologia, 2012
Johnson et al., Diabetologia, 2011
I Cancer incidence study in the total population.
I Comparing diabetes patients with non-diabetespatients.
I Outcome: Rate-ratio of cancer occurrencebetween DM-patients and non-DM persons inthe entire population.
I Cancers in DM ptt: Denmark 22,826B.C. 12,438
— by far the largest studies to date.
6/ 16
The Danish & British Columbia studiesCarstensen et al., Diabetologia, 2012
Johnson et al., Diabetologia, 2011
I Cancer incidence study in the total population.
I Comparing diabetes patients with non-diabetespatients.
I Outcome: Rate-ratio of cancer occurrencebetween DM-patients and non-DM persons inthe entire population.
I Cancers in DM ptt: Denmark 22,826B.C. 12,438
— by far the largest studies to date.
6/ 16
The Danish study — main sitesRate ratios
All cancers 1.2Digestive system ≈ 1.2Liver M: 4.0 F: 1.8Pancreas 2.8Lung 1.2Breast 1.04 (1.00; 1.09)Endometrium 1.6Kidney 1.7Bladder M: 1.2 F: 1.0Prostate 0.95Brain, lymphomas 1.2
7/ 16
The Danish study — main sitesRate ratios
All cancers 1.2Digestive system ≈ 1.2Liver M: 4.0 F: 1.8Pancreas 2.8Lung 1.2Breast 1.04 (1.00; 1.09)Endometrium 1.6Kidney 1.7Bladder M: 1.2 F: 1.0Prostate 0.95Brain, lymphomas 1.2
7/ 16
Danish study
Well
Ca (W) Dead (Ca)
Dead (O)
DM
Ca (DM) Dead (Ca)
Dead (O)
DM+Ins
Ca (Ins) Dead (Ca)
Dead (O)
Well
Ca (W) Dead (Ca)
Dead (O)
DM
Ca (DM) Dead (Ca)
Dead (O)
DM+Ins
Ca (Ins) Dead (Ca)
Dead (O)
Well
Ca (W) Dead (Ca)
Dead (O)
DM
Ca (DM) Dead (Ca)
Dead (O)
DM+Ins
Ca (Ins) Dead (Ca)
Dead (O)
8/ 16
0 3 6 9 120.5
1.0
2.0
5.0
●
●
M
0 3 6 9 12
●
●
F
Diabetes duration (years)
Rat
e ra
tio D
M, D
M+
Ins
vs N
o D
M
All malignant neoplasms
9/ 16
0 3 6 9 120.5
1.0
2.0
5.0
●
M
0 3 6 9 12
●
F
Insulin duration (years)
Rat
e ra
tio D
M+
Ins
vs D
M
All malignant neoplasms
10/ 16
0 3 6 9 12
0.5
1.0
2.0
●
●
0 3 6 9 12
●●
Diabetes duration (years)
Rat
e ra
tio D
M, D
M+
Ins
vs N
o D
M
Prostate Breast
11/ 16
Johnson et
al, Diabetolo-
gia, 2011
Breastcancer
12/ 16
Johnson et
al, Diabetolo-
gia, 2011
Prostatecancer
13/ 16
0 3 6 9 120.5
1.0
2.0
5.0
●
●
M
0 3 6 9 12
●
●
F
Diabetes duration (years)
Rat
e ra
tio D
M, D
M+
Ins
vs N
o D
M
Lung, bronchus and pleura
14/ 16
Cumulative risk of cancer
No DM DM DM+InsM F M F M F
0
20
40
60
80
10010
yea
r cu
mul
ativ
e ris
ks o
f can
cer
and
deat
hAge at start: 60 years Age at start: 65 years Age at start: 70 years
No DM DM DM+InsM F M F M F
Age at start: 60 years Age at start: 65 years Age at start: 70 years
No DM DM DM+InsM F M F M F
Age at start: 60 years Age at start: 65 years Age at start: 70 years
15/ 16
Conclusions
1. Detection “bias” (shortly after diagnosis ofdiabetes) ⇒ overall effects on incidence mustevaluated in the long term
2. Short term-studies (e.g. Glargine) studies likelybiased.
3. Colorectal, liver, pancreas, corpus uteri, kidneyhave elevated long-term rates.
4. Insulin treated generally have higher cancerrates than non-insulin treated.
5. Lung cancer elevated only for insulin treated.6. No exess risk of breast cancer for DM patients,
regardless of treatment.7. Smaller incidence rates for prostate.
16/ 16
Conclusions
1. Detection “bias” (shortly after diagnosis ofdiabetes) ⇒ overall effects on incidence mustevaluated in the long term
2. Short term-studies (e.g. Glargine) studies likelybiased.
3. Colorectal, liver, pancreas, corpus uteri, kidneyhave elevated long-term rates.
4. Insulin treated generally have higher cancerrates than non-insulin treated.
5. Lung cancer elevated only for insulin treated.6. No exess risk of breast cancer for DM patients,
regardless of treatment.7. Smaller incidence rates for prostate.
16/ 16
Conclusions
1. Detection “bias” (shortly after diagnosis ofdiabetes) ⇒ overall effects on incidence mustevaluated in the long term
2. Short term-studies (e.g. Glargine) studies likelybiased.
3. Colorectal, liver, pancreas, corpus uteri, kidneyhave elevated long-term rates.
4. Insulin treated generally have higher cancerrates than non-insulin treated.
5. Lung cancer elevated only for insulin treated.6. No exess risk of breast cancer for DM patients,
regardless of treatment.7. Smaller incidence rates for prostate.
16/ 16
Conclusions
1. Detection “bias” (shortly after diagnosis ofdiabetes) ⇒ overall effects on incidence mustevaluated in the long term
2. Short term-studies (e.g. Glargine) studies likelybiased.
3. Colorectal, liver, pancreas, corpus uteri, kidneyhave elevated long-term rates.
4. Insulin treated generally have higher cancerrates than non-insulin treated.
5. Lung cancer elevated only for insulin treated.6. No exess risk of breast cancer for DM patients,
regardless of treatment.7. Smaller incidence rates for prostate.
16/ 16
Conclusions
1. Detection “bias” (shortly after diagnosis ofdiabetes) ⇒ overall effects on incidence mustevaluated in the long term
2. Short term-studies (e.g. Glargine) studies likelybiased.
3. Colorectal, liver, pancreas, corpus uteri, kidneyhave elevated long-term rates.
4. Insulin treated generally have higher cancerrates than non-insulin treated.
5. Lung cancer elevated only for insulin treated.6. No exess risk of breast cancer for DM patients,
regardless of treatment.7. Smaller incidence rates for prostate.
16/ 16
Conclusions
1. Detection “bias” (shortly after diagnosis ofdiabetes) ⇒ overall effects on incidence mustevaluated in the long term
2. Short term-studies (e.g. Glargine) studies likelybiased.
3. Colorectal, liver, pancreas, corpus uteri, kidneyhave elevated long-term rates.
4. Insulin treated generally have higher cancerrates than non-insulin treated.
5. Lung cancer elevated only for insulin treated.6. No exess risk of breast cancer for DM patients,
regardless of treatment.7. Smaller incidence rates for prostate.
16/ 16
Conclusions
1. Detection “bias” (shortly after diagnosis ofdiabetes) ⇒ overall effects on incidence mustevaluated in the long term
2. Short term-studies (e.g. Glargine) studies likelybiased.
3. Colorectal, liver, pancreas, corpus uteri, kidneyhave elevated long-term rates.
4. Insulin treated generally have higher cancerrates than non-insulin treated.
5. Lung cancer elevated only for insulin treated.6. No exess risk of breast cancer for DM patients,
regardless of treatment.7. Smaller incidence rates for prostate.
16/ 16
Conclusions
1. Detection “bias” (shortly after diagnosis ofdiabetes) ⇒ overall effects on incidence mustevaluated in the long term
2. Short term-studies (e.g. Glargine) studies likelybiased.
3. Colorectal, liver, pancreas, corpus uteri, kidneyhave elevated long-term rates.
4. Insulin treated generally have higher cancerrates than non-insulin treated.
5. Lung cancer elevated only for insulin treated.6. No exess risk of breast cancer for DM patients,
regardless of treatment.7. Smaller incidence rates for prostate.
16/ 16
Conclusions
1. Detection “bias” (shortly after diagnosis ofdiabetes) ⇒ overall effects on incidence mustevaluated in the long term
2. Short term-studies (e.g. Glargine) studies likelybiased.
3. Colorectal, liver, pancreas, corpus uteri, kidneyhave elevated long-term rates.
4. Insulin treated generally have higher cancerrates than non-insulin treated.
5. Lung cancer elevated only for insulin treated.6. No exess risk of breast cancer for DM patients,
regardless of treatment.7. Smaller incidence rates for prostate.
16/ 16