MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396626883 · doi:10.1097/js9.0000000000001514

Association of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists with risk of cancers-evidence from a drug target Mendelian randomization and clinical trials

2024· review· en· W4396626883 on OpenAlexaff
Yuming Sun, Yongjia Liu, Yating Dian, Furong Zeng, Guangtong Deng, Shaorong Lei

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsSKiN Health
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMendelian randomizationMedicineInternal medicineGlucagon-like peptide 1 receptorType 2 diabetesOncologyCochrane LibrarySingle-nucleotide polymorphismMeta-analysisEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitusGenotypeGeneticsReceptorGenetic variantsAgonistGeneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP1R) agonists have been approved by Food and Drug Administration for management of obesity. However, the causal relationship of GLP1R agonists (GLP1RA) with cancers still unclear. METHODS: The available cis-eQTLs for drugs target genes (GLP1R) were used as proxies for exposure to GLP1RA. Mendelian randomizations (MR) were performed to reveal the association of genetically-proxied GLP1RA with 14 common types cancer from large-scale consortia. Type 2 diabetes was used as positive control, and the GWASs data including 80 154 cases and 853 816 controls. Replicating the findings in the FinnGen study and then pooled with meta-analysis. Finally, all the related randomized controlled trails (RCTs) on GLP1RA were systematically searched from PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library to comprehensively synthesize the evidence to validate any possible association with cancers. RESULT: A total of 22 significant cis-eQTL single-nucleotide polymorphisms were included as genetic instrument. The association of genetically-proxied GLP1RA with significantly decreased type 2 diabetes risk [OR (95%)=0.82 (0.79-0.86), P <0.001], which ensuring the effectiveness of identified genetic instruments. The authors found favorable evidence to support the association of GLP1RA with reduced breast cancer and basal cell carcinoma risk [0.92 (0.88-0.96), P <0.001, 0.92 (0.85-0.99), P =0.029, respectively], and with increased colorectal cancer risk [1.12 (1.07-1.18), P <0.001]. In addition, there was no suggestive evidence to support the association of GLP1RA with ovarian cancer [0.99 (0.90-1.09), P =0.827], lung cancer [1.01 (0.93-1.10), P =0760], and thyroid cancer [0.83 (0.63-1.10), P =0.187]. Our findings were consistent with the meta-analysis. Finally, 80 RCTs were included in the systematic review, with a low incidence of different kinds of cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that GLP1RA may decrease the risk of breast cancer and basal cell carcinoma, but increase the risk of colorectal cancer. However, according to the systematic review of RCTs, the incidence of cancer in patients treated with GLP1RA is low. Larger sample sizes of RCTs with long-term follow-up are necessary to establish the incidence of cancers and evaluate the risk-benefit ratios.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.080
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.171
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0800.171
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.018
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.308 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations67
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of SurgerySame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207