Search

IMPORTANCE Men with type 2 diabetes have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). Meanwhile, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists used in prostate cancer (PCa) are associated with increased risk of CVD. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association between GnRH agonist use, PCa diagnosis per se, and CVD risk in men with type 2 diabetes. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS This nationwide population-based cohort study identified men with type 2 diabetes by use of data in the Prostate Cancer Data Base Sweden version 4.1 and the Swedish National Diabetes Register, with longitudinal data from 2006 to 2016. These data were used to create 2 cohorts, 1 including men with and without PCa and the other including men with PCa who received and did not receive GnRH agonists. Data analysis was conducted from January 2006 to December 2016. EXPOSURES Treatment with GnRH agonists and PCa diagnosis were the primary exposures. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Primary outcome was a 10% increase in predicted 5-year CVD risk score. Secondary outcome was worsening hypertension as defined by the European Society of Hypertension Guidelines. Cox proportional hazards regression models were used to analyze the association. RESULTS The PCa exposure cohort included 5714 men (median [IQR] age, 72.0 [11.0]), and the non-PCa cohort included 28 445 men without PCa (median [IQR] age, 72.0 [11.0]). The GnRH agonist-exposure cohort included 692 men with PCa who received a GnRH agonist, compared with 3460 men with PCa who did not receive a GnRH agonist. Men with PCa receiving GnRH agonists had an increased estimated 5-year CVD risk score compared with men without PCa (hazard ratio [HR], 1.25; 95% CI, 1.16-1.36) and compared with men with PCa not receiving GnRH agonists (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.35-1.74). Men receiving GnRH agonists had decreased blood pressure compared with men without PCa (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.80) and compared with men with PCa not receiving GnRH agonists (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.

PURPOSE Pathways involving sex hormones and insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) have been proposed to explain, in part, the lower risk of prostate cancer among men with diabetes. To gain insights into potential biological mechanisms we explored differences in serum concentrations of sex hormones and IGFs across the trajectory from normoglycemia to prediabetes to poorly controlled diabetes. METHODS Using cross-sectional data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III we examined differences in levels of circulating sex hormones, sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), IGF-1, and IFG-binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3), according to diabetes status: no diabetes [n = 648], prediabetes [n = 578], undiagnosed diabetes [n = 106], well-controlled diabetes [n = 42], and poorly controlled diabetes [n = 56]. Adjusted geometric mean concentrations were derived using multivariable linear regression, adjusted for age, race, and other lifestyle factors. RESULTS Total testosterone concentrations were lower among prediabetics (4.89 ng/mL, 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.95-5.21) than men without prediabetes/diabetes (5.29 ng/mL, 95% CI 5.06-5.53) but did not reduce further across diabetes groups. Concentrations of estradiol, estimated free testosterone, SHGB, IGF-1, and IGFBP-3 did not differ. While the ratio of IGF-1 to IGFBP-3 was lower among men with prediabetics and undiagnosed diabetes than men without prediabetes/diabetes, there was no trend across groups. A positive trend for the ratio of estradiol-to-testosterone levels was observed across groups (p trend = 0.045). CONCLUSION Our findings do not provide clear support for either an androgen driven or IGF-driven pathway for the inverse association between diabetes and prostate cancer risk.