PURPOSE: Studies suggest that regular use of metformin may decrease cancer mortality. We investigated the association between diabetes medication use and cancer survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current study includes 633 breast, 890 colorectal, 824 lung, and 543 gastric cancer cases identified from participants of two population-based cohort studies in Shanghai. Information on diabetes medication use was obtained by linking to electronic medical records. The associations between diabetes medication use (metformin, sulfonylureas, and insulin) and overall and cancer-specific survival were evaluated using time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: After adjustment for clinical characteristics and treatment factors, use of metformin was associated with better overall survival among colorectal cancer patients (hazards ratio [HR], 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34 to 0.88) and for all four types of cancer combined (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.98). Ever use of insulin was associated with worse survival for all cancer types combined (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.57 to 2.29) and for the four cancer types individually. Similar associations were seen for diabetic patients. Sulfonylureas use was associated with worse overall survival for breast or gastric cancer (HR, 2.87; 95% CI, 1.22 to 6.80 and HR, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.09 to 3.84, respectively) among diabetic patients. Similar association patterns were observed between diabetes medication use and cancer-specific survival. CONCLUSION: Metformin was associated with improved survival among colorectal cancer cases, while insulin use was associated with worse survival among patients of four major cancers. Further investigation on the topic is needed given the potential translational impact of these findings.
Breast ; Cohort Studies ; Colorectal Neoplasms ; Electronic Health Records ; Humans ; Insulin ; Lung ; Metformin ; Mortality ; Proportional Hazards Models ; Stomach Neoplasms

Objective To evaluate the clinical characteristics of left ventricular fat replacement. Methods We identified 45 patients [28M/17F, mean age (51.9 ± 14. 7 )years] with left ventricular myocardial fat replacement ( CT value ≤ - 30 Hu) by cardiovascular CT. Results Among 45 patients, 25 patients[20M/5F, mean age (61.2 ± 10. 4) years] were diagnosed as coronary artery disease (CAD). There was 56% single-vessel disease, 20% double-vessel disease and 24% triple-vessel disease,true left ventricular aneurysm was detected in 3 patients and left ventricular thrombi in 1 patient, the dimension of left ventricle was (54. 5 ±9. 4) mm and the LVEF was (51.8 ± 13 ) % in CAD group. In this group, fat replacement occurred in the region of myocardial infarction and presented as curvilinear band in subendocardial region. The left ventricular wall thickness was lower than 5 mm in 21 cases. The location of fat replacement in CAD group is as follows: apical region in 18 patients, distal septal in 15 patients, distal anterior in 11 patients, mid-septal in 7 patients, mid-anterior in 7 patients and basal in 1 patients. The age of remaining 20 patients (8M/12F) without CAD were (57. 8 ± 13.3) years. In the group of non-CAD,dilated cardiomyopathy was diagnosed in 3 patients, atrial septal defect in 1 patient, rheumatic heart disease in 1 patient, there was no structural heart disease in the remaining 15 patients. The dimension of left ventricle was (51.1 ± 9. 1 ) mm and the LVEF was (59. 4 ± 13.9 )%. In non-CAD group, fat replacement mainly occurred in septal region, presented as curvilinear band in 17 patients and patch in 3 patients. The location of fat replacement in this group is as follows: mid-septal region in 11 patients, distal-septal in 10 patients and apical in 9 patients. The intramural fat replacement was detected in 14 patients: subendocardial fat replacement in 10 patients and both intramural and subendocardial fat replacement in 4 patients. Conclusions Left ventricular fat replacement could be documented in CAD patients, non-CAD cardiomypathy patients and in patients without structural heart disease. Left ventricular fat replacement often positioned in apical region in CAD patients as a consequence of infarct healing while mostly positioned in septal region in non-CAD patients, the definite clinical implication of left ventricular fat replacement in nonCAD patients remains to be clarified.