Objective
Impaired glucose tolerance and diabetes are risk factors for the development of uterine cancer. Although greater progression free survival among diabetic patients with ovarian and breast cancer using metformin have been reported, no studies have assessed the association of metformin use with survival in women with endometrial cancer (EC).
Methods
We conducted a single-institution retrospective cohort study of all patients treated for uterine cancer from January 1999 through December 2009. Demographic, medical, social, and survival data were abstracted from medical records and the national death registry. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox models were utilized for multivariate analysis. All statistical tests were two-sided.
Results
Of 985 patients, 114 (12%) had diabetes and were treated with metformin, 136 (14%) were diabetic but did not use metformin, and 735 (74%) had not been diagnosed with diabetes. Greater OS was observed in diabetics with non-endometrioid EC who used metformin than in diabetic cases not using metformin and non-endometrioid EC cases without diabetes (log rank test (p=0.02)). This association remained significant (hazard ratio = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.30–0.97, p<0.04) after adjusting for age, clinical stage, grade, chemotherapy treatment, radiation treatment and presence of hyperlipidemia in multivariate analysis. No association between metformin use and OS in diabetics with endometrioid histology was observed.
Conclusion
Diabetic EC patients with non-endometrioid tumors who used metformin had lower risk of death than women with EC who did not use metformin. These data suggest that metformin might be useful as adjuvant therapy for non-endometrioid EC.
Women with stage I endometrioid endometrial cancer with synchronous stage I endometrioid ovarian cancer have a survival outcome similar to those with stage I endometrioid endometrial cancer without synchronous ovarian cancer.
We have developed and evaluated a next-generation bisulfite sequencing (NGS) assay to distinguish HPV16 cervical precancer (CIN2-3; N=59) from HPV16-positive transient infections (N=40). Cervical DNA was isolated and treated with bisulfite and HPV16 methylation was quantified by (1) amplification with barcoded primers and massively parallel single molecule sequencing and (2) site-specific pyrosequencing. Assays were evaluated for agreement using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). Odds ratios (OR) for high methylation vs. low methylation were calculated. Single site pyrosequencing and NGS data were correlated (ICC=0.61) and both indicated hypermethylation was associated with precancer (ORs of 2-37). Concordant NGS and pyrosequencing results yieled ORs that were stronger when compared to using either assay separately. Within the L1 region, the ORs for CIN2-3 were 14.3 and 22.4 using pyrosequencing and NGS assays, respectively; when both methods agreed the OR was 153. NGS assays provide methylation haplotypes, termed methyl-haplotypes from single molecule reads: cases had increased methyl-haplotypes with ≥ 1 methylated CpG site(s) per fragment compared to controls, particularly in L1 (P=3.0×10−8). The maximum discrimination of cases from controls for a L1 methyl-haplotype had an AUC of 0.89 corresponding to a sensitivity of 92.5% and a specificity of 73.1%. The strengthening of the OR when the two assays were concordant suggests the true association of CpG methylation with precancer is stronger than with either assay. As cervical cancer prevention moves to DNA testing methods, DNA based biomarkers, such as HPV methylation could serve as a reflex strategy to identify women at high risk for cervix cancer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.