Mendelian randomization revealing the protective effect of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibition on prostate cancer with verified evidence from electronic healthcare and biological data

Abstract

Background Observational studies indicated a decreased risk of prostate cancer by SGLT2 inhibitors, but high-quality evidence is lacking to make a clear conclusion. We evaluated the effect of SGLT2 inhibition on prostate cancer risk by triangulating evidence from three methods.

Methods Genetic variants associated with HbA_1c levels (P<5×10^-8) in the genomic region of the target gene, SLC5A2, were used to proxy SGLT2 inhibition. In discovery, Mendelian randomization (MR) was applied to estimate effects of genetically proxied SGLT2 inhibition on risk of prostate cancer and its subtypes (79,148 cases and 61,106 controls). In a validation using electronic healthcare data, the association of incidence of prostate cancer between 24,155 new users of SGLT2 inhibitors and 24,155 new users of the active comparator, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, was estimated using electronic health-care data. In a biological validation, the differential gene expression of SLC5A2 between normal prostate tissue and tumour tissue were estimated in 691 prostate cancer patients. To validate the influence of glucose, the association between HbA_1c levels and incident prostate cancer during 10-years of follow-up were estimated.

Findings For genetic evidence, genetically proxied SGLT2 inhibition reduced the risk of overall (odds ratio=0.56, 95%CI=0.38 to 0.82), advanced (OR=0.52, 95%CI=0.27 to 0.99) and early-onset (OR=0.27, 95%CI=0.11 to 0.72) prostate cancer. For electronic healthcare evidence, usage of SGLT2 inhibitor was associated with a 23% reduced risk of prostate cancer (hazard ratio=0.77, 95%CI=0.61 to 0.99) in males with diabetes. For biological evidence, expression levels of the SLC5A2 gene in tumour prostate tissue was 2.02-fold higher than that in normal tissue (P=0.006). Genetically proxied HbA_1c and observed HbA_1c provided little evidence to support an association with total/incident prostate cancer, implies a non-glycemic effect of SGLT2 inhibition on prostate cancer.

Interpretation This study provides genetic, electronic healthcare, and biological evidence to support a beneficial effect of SGLT2 inhibition on reducing prostate cancer risk. Future trials are warranted to investigate whether SLGT2 inhibitors can been recommended for diabetic individuals with high risk of prostate cancer or considered as an anti-prostate cancer therapy.

Funding AMS, MRC and NSFC.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Evidence before this study We searched PubMed, Embase and clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception up to July 11, 2023 using the search terms: “SGLT2 inhibitor”, “canagliflozin”, “dapagliflozin”, or “empagliflozin” and “prostate cancer” and “clinical trials”, without language restrictions. Some functionals studies provided evidence of SGLT2 inhibition on reduce the viability of prostate cancer cells but lack of human-based evidence. Only one clinical trial study is investigating the role of SGLT2 inhibitors on prostate cancer in individuals with diabetes. Other 46 trials of SGLT2 inhibitors set prostate cancer as secondary outcome, the prostate cancer cases were limited for these studies, power issues have prevented clear causal inference. Little has been done to establish the causal role of SGLT2 inhibition on total and incident prostate cancer.

Added value of this study In this study, Mendelian randomization (MR) was applied in 140,254 men (79,148 with prostate cancer), and suggested that genetically proxied SGLT2 inhibition showed an effect on 44%, 48% and 73% reduced risk of total-, advanced- and early-onset prostate cancer in the general male population. Validation analysis using electronic health-care record data (81,122 men with diabetes) suggested that usage of SGLT2 inhibitor was associated with a 23% reduced risk of prostate cancer in males with diabetes. The differential expression analysis in 639 men with prostate cancer showed that the expression of SGLT2 was 2.02 folds higher in prostate cancer tissues compared with that in surrounding normal prostate tissues. As a benchmark, MR and observational analyses showed little evidence to support an effect of HbA1c on prostate cancer, which suggests a potential non-HbA_1c effect of SGLT2 inhibition on prostate cancer.

Implication of all the available evidence There were multiple sources of evidence to support a protective role of genetically proxied SGLT2 inhibition and usage of SGLT2 inhibitors on risk of prostate cancer in men with and without diabetes and/or prostate cancer. Future clinical trials should be prioritised for investigation of the long-term use of SGLT2 inhibitors in the prevention and treatment of prostate cancer.

Competing Interest Statement

GDS reports Scientific Advisory Board Membership for Relation Therapeutics and Insitro.

Funding Statement

J.Z. is supported by the Academy of Medical Sciences (AMS) Springboard Award, the Wellcome Trust, the Government Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), the British Heart Foundation and Diabetes UK (SBF006/1117). J.Z. is funded by the Vice-Chancellor Fellowship from the University of Bristol. J.L.L., M.X., G.N., and Y.B. are supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82088102, 81970691, 81970728, 81930021 and 81941017) and Shanghai Clinical Research Center for Metabolic Disease (19MC1910100). J.L.L., M.X., Y.X., T.W., M.L., Z.Z., S.W., H.L., G.N., W.W., and Y.B. are members of the Innovative Research Team of High-level Local Universities in Shanghai. G.N. and Y.B. are supported by the Shanghai Shenkang Hospital Development Center (SHDC12019101, SHDC2020CR1001A, SHDC2020CR3064B). V.W., G.D.S. and T.R.G. are supported by the UK Medical Research Council Integrative Epidemiology Unit (MC_UU_00032/03). R.M.M, S.H. and P.D. received support from a Cancer Research UK (C18281/A29019) programme grant (the Integrative Cancer Epidemiology Grant). R.M.M., T.R.G. & G.D.S. are also supported by the NIHR Bristol Biomedical Research Centre which is funded by the NIHR and is a partnership between University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust and the University of Bristol. Department of Health and Social Care disclaimer: The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care. JY is supported by a Cancer Research UK Population Research Postdoctoral Fellowship (C68933/A28534). R.M.M. is a National Institute for Health Research Senior Investigator (NIHR202411).

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

UK Biobank has received ethical approval from the UK National Health Service National Research Ethics Service (ref 11/ NW/0382). All other studies contributing data to this analysis had the relevant institutional review board approval from each country and all participants provided informed consent.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes