Search

PURPOSE: We investigated the effect of metformin and lifestyle intervention on metabolic, inflammatory, and steroid biomarkers of breast cancer (BC) recurrence risk in two intervention trials among BC survivors with overweight or obesity. METHODS: Baseline and follow-up serum samples collected during the two trials were analyzed and data pooled. The USA trial (Reach for Health) included postmenopausal BC survivors (n = 333) randomly assigned to 6-month metformin vs placebo and lifestyle intervention (LSI) vs control (2 × 2 factorial design). The Italian trial (MetBreCS) included BC survivors (n = 40) randomized to 12-month metformin vs placebo. Insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), adipokines, cytokines, and steroids were measured. RESULTS: Metformin compared to placebo showed a favorable decrease in leptin (- 8.8 vs - 3.5 ng/mL; p

PurposeMetformin use has been associated with a decreased risk of age-related macular degeneration (AMD) progression in observational studies. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of oral metformin for slowing geographic atrophy (GA) progression.DesignParallel-group, multicenter, randomized phase II clinical trial.ParticipantsParticipants aged ≥ 55 years without diabetes who had GA from atrophic AMD in ≥ 1 eye.MethodsWe enrolled participants across 12 clinical centers and randomized participants in a 1:1 ratio to receive oral metformin (2000 mg daily) or observation for 18 months. Fundus autofluorescence imaging was obtained at baseline and every 6 months.Main outcome measuresThe primary efficacy endpoint was the annualized enlargement rate of the square root-transformed GA area. Secondary endpoints included best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA) and low luminance visual acuity (LLVA) at each visit.ResultsOf 66 enrolled participants, 34 (57 eyes) were randomized to the observation group and 32 (53 eyes) were randomized to the treatment group. The median follow-up duration was 13.9 and 12.6 months in the observation and metformin groups, respectively. The mean ± standard error annualized enlargement rate of square root transformed GA area was 0.35 ± 0.04 mm/year in the observation group and 0.42 ± 0.04 mm/year in the treatment group (risk difference = 0.07 mm/year, 95% confidence interval = -0.05 to 0.18 mm/year; P = 0.26). The mean ± standard error decline in BCVA was 4.8 ± 1.7 letters/year in the observation group and 3.4 ± 1.1 letters/year in the treatment group (P = 0.56). The mean ± standard error decline in LLVA was 7.3 ± 2.5 letters/year in the observation group and 0.8 ± 2.2 letters/year in the treatment group (P = 0.06). Fourteen participants in the metformin group experienced nonserious adverse events related to metformin, with gastrointestinal side effects as the most common. No serious adverse events were attributed to metformin.ConclusionsThe results of this trial as conducted do not support oral metformin having effects on reducing the progression of GA. Additional placebo-controlled trials are needed to explore the role of metformin for AMD, especially for earlier stages of the disease.Financial disclosuresProprietary or commercial disclosure may be found in the Footnotes and Disclosures at the end of this article.

BACKGROUND: Combining cytotoxic chemotherapy or novel anticancer drugs with T-cell modulators holds great promise in treating advanced cancers. However, the response varies depending on the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME). Therefore, there is a clear need for pharmacologically tractable models of the TIME to dissect its influence on mono- and combination treatment response at the individual level. METHODS: Here we establish a patient-derived explant culture (PDEC) model of breast cancer, which retains the immune contexture of the primary tumor, recapitulating cytokine profiles and CD8+T cell cytotoxic activity. RESULTS: We explored the immunomodulatory action of a synthetic lethal BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax+metformin drug combination ex vivo, discovering metformin cannot overcome the lymphocyte-depleting action of venetoclax. Instead, metformin promotes dendritic cell maturation through inhibition of mitochondrial complex I, increasing their capacity to co-stimulate CD4+T cells and thus facilitating antitumor immunity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results establish PDECs as a feasible model to identify immunomodulatory functions of anticancer drugs in the context of patient-specific TIME.

BACKGROUND: Due to encouraging pre-clinical data and supportive observational studies, there has been growing interest in applying cardiovascular drugs (including aspirin, angiotensin-converting enzyme [ACE] inhibitors, statins, and metformin) approved to treat diseases such as hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus to the field of oncology. Moreover, given growing costs with cancer care, these medications have offered a potentially more affordable avenue to treat or prevent recurrence of cancer. We sought to investigate the anti-cancer effects of drugs repurposed from cardiology or anti-inflammatories to treat cancer. We specifically evaluated the following drug classes: HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins), cyclo-oxygenase inhibitors, aspirin, metformin, and both angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We also included non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) because they exert a similar mechanism to aspirin by blocking prostaglandins and reducing inflammation that is thought to promote the development of cancer. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature review using PubMed and Web of Science with search terms including aspirin, NSAID, statin (including specific statin drug names), metformin, ACE inhibitors, and ARBs (including specific anti-hypertensive drug names) in combination with cancer. Searches were limited to human studies published between 2000 and 2023. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The number and percentage of studies reported positive results and pooled estimates of overall survival, progression-free survival, response, and disease-free survival. RESULTS: We reviewed 3094 titles and included 67 randomized clinical trials. The most common drugs that were tested were metformin (n = 21; 30.9%), celecoxib (n = 20; 29.4%), and simvastatin (n = 8; 11.8%). There was only one study that tested cardiac glycosides and none that studied ACE inhibitors. The most common tumor types were non-small-cell lung cancer (n = 19; 27.9%); breast (n = 8; 20.6%), colorectal (n = 7; 10.3%), and hepatocellular (n = 6; 8.8%). Most studies were conducted in a phase II trial (n = 38; 55.9%). Most studies were tested in metastatic cancers (n = 49; 72.1%) and in the first-line setting (n = 36; 521.9%). Four studies (5.9%) were stopped early because of difficulty with accrual. The majority of studies did not demonstrate an improvement in either progression-free survival (86.1% of studies testing progression-free survival) or in overall survival (94.3% of studies testing overall survival). Progression-free survival was improved in five studies (7.4%), and overall survival was improved in three studies (4.4%). Overall survival was significantly worse in two studies (3.8% of studies testing overall survival), and progression-free survival was worse in one study (2.8% of studies testing progression-free survival). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Despite promising pre-clinical and population-based data, cardiovascular drugs and anti-inflammatory medications have overall not demonstrated benefit in the treatment or preventing recurrence of cancer. These findings may help guide future potential clinical trials involving these medications when applied in oncology.

IntroductionMetformin has been used as a targeted treatment to potentially improve cognition and slow the typical IQ decline that occurs during development among individuals with fragile X syndrome (FXS). In this follow-up study, we are following the trajectory of IQ and adaptive behavior changes over 1 to 3 years in individuals with FXS who are clinically treated with metformin in an open label trial.MethodIndividuals with FXS ages 6 to 25 years (mean 13.15 ± 5.50) and nonverbal IQ mean 57.69 (±15.46) were treated for 1-3 years (1.88 ± 0.63). They all had a baseline IQ test using the Leiter-III non-verbal cognitive assessment and the Vineland-III adaptive behavior assessment before the start of metformin. Repeat Leiter-III and Vineland-III were completed after at least 1 year of metformin (500-1,000 mg/dose given twice a day).ResultThere were no significant changes in non-verbal IQ or in the adaptive behavior measurements at FDR

The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) randomized controlled trial demonstrated that metformin treatment reduced progression to type 2 diabetes (T2D) by 31% compared to placebo in adults with prediabetes. Circulating micro-ribonucleic acids (miRs) are promising biomarkers of T2D risk, but little is known about their associations with metformin regimens for T2D risk reduction. We compared the change in 24 circulating miRs from baseline to 2 years in a subset from DPP metformin intervention (n = 50) and placebo (n = 50) groups using Wilcoxon signed rank tests. Spearman correlations were used to evaluate associations between miR change and baseline clinical characteristics. Multiple linear regression was used to adjust for covariates. The sample was 73% female, 17% Black, 13% Hispanic, and 50 ± 11 years. Participants were obese, normotensive, prediabetic, and dyslipidemic. Change in 12 miR levels from baseline to 2 years was significantly different in the metformin group compared with placebo after adjusting for multiple comparisons: six (let-7c-5p, miR-151a-3p, miR-17-5p, miR-20b-5p, miR-29b-3p, and miR-93-5p) were significantly upregulated and six (miR-130b-3p, miR-22-3p, miR-222-3p, miR-320a-3p, miR-320c, miR-92a-3p) were significantly downregulated in the metformin group. These miRs help to explain how metformin is linked to T2D risk reduction, which may lead to novel biomarkers, therapeutics, and precision health strategies.