• The lancet oncology · Jul 2010

    Review Meta Analysis

    Angiotensin-receptor blockade and risk of cancer: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

    • Ilke Sipahi, Sara M Debanne, Douglas Y Rowland, Daniel I Simon, and James C Fang.
    • Harrington-McLaughlin Heart & Vascular Institute, University Hospitals Case Medical Center, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH 44106, USA. ilkesipahi@gmail.com
    • Lancet Oncol. 2010 Jul 1; 11 (7): 627-36.

    BackgroundAngiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) are a widely used drug class approved for treatment of hypertension, heart failure, diabetic nephropathy, and, recently, for cardiovascular risk reduction. Experimental studies implicate the renin-angiotensin system, particularly angiotensin II type-1 and type-2 receptors, in the regulation of cell proliferation, angiogenesis, and tumour progression. We assessed whether ARBs affect cancer occurrence with a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of these drugs.MethodsWe searched Medline, Scopus (including Embase), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the US Food and Drug Administration website for studies published before November, 2009, that included any of the seven currently available ARBs. Randomised controlled trials with an ARB given in at least one group, with a follow-up of at least 1 year, and that enrolled at least 100 patients were included. New-cancer data were available for 61,590 patients from five trials. Data on common types of solid organ cancers were available for 68,402 patients from five trials, and data on cancer deaths were available for 93,515 patients from eight trials.FindingsTelmisartan was the study drug in 30,014 (85.7%) patients who received ARBs as part of the trials with new cancer data. Patients randomly assigned to receive ARBs had a significantly increased risk of new cancer occurrence compared with patients in control groups (7.2%vs 6.0%, risk ratio [RR] 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.15; p=0.016). When analysis was limited to trials where cancer was a prespecified endpoint, the RR was 1.11 (95% CI 1.04-1.18, p=0.001). Among specific solid organ cancers examined, only new lung-cancer occurrence was significantly higher in patients randomly assigned to receive ARBs than in those assigned to receive control (0.9%vs 0.7%, RR 1.25, 1.05-1.49; p=0.01). No statistically significant difference in cancer deaths was observed (1.8%vs 1.6%, RR 1.07, 0.97-1.18; p=0.183).InterpretationThis meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials suggests that ARBs are associated with a modestly increased risk of new cancer diagnosis. Given the limited data, it is not possible to draw conclusions about the exact risk of cancer associated with each particular drug. These findings warrant further investigation.2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.