Efficacy of metformin drug in preventing metabolic syndrome associated with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in prostate cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Abstract

Background: Prostate cancer patients undergoing long-term (Androgen deprivation therapy) ADT will tend to have metabolic changes. Metabolic syndrome represents the accumulation of several medical conditions that significantly increase the risk of developing severe diseases like cardiovascular disorders, insulin resistance, and hyperglycemia. We are conducting this systematic review and meta-analysis to fill up the gap and to resolve the debate regarding the effectiveness of metformin in reducing metabolic syndrome associated with ADT in prostate cancer patients.

Methods: We conducted the systematic review and meta-analysis according to the Handbook of Cochrane Systematic Review of Intervention and the PRISMA guidelines. We conducted the search process using the following databases: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. We selected the articles that fit within the following criteria, Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and Cohort studies which evaluate the efficacy of metformin in reducing metabolic syndromes for prostate cancer patients undergoing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT). The efficacy of metformin in metabolic syndrome that resulted from using androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer patients was evaluated by the changes from baseline in Body Mass Index (BMI), waist circumference by cm, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and blood pressure both systolic and diastolic. Revman software Version 5.4.1 was used to perform all statistical analyses.

Results: Our search retrieved 781 records. Seven records were included in our study: 5 published randomized control clinical trials and 2 cohort studies and only 6 studies were included in the meta-analysis. For BMI the pooled effect estimates of 3 studies favored Metformin over placebo, but this is not a significant difference (MD = -0.9, P = 0.05), for systolic pressure the pooled effect estimates of 3 studies favored Metformin over placebo, but this is not a significantly different placebo (MD = -3.18, P = 0.22), for HBA1c the pooled effect estimates of 3 studies showed that no significant difference between placebo and metformin (MD = -0.01, P = 0.86)002E CONCLUSION: Despite the promising direction in some parameters, our findings underscore the need for further research to establish a clearer understanding of metformin's role in mitigating metabolic changes in prostate cancer patients undergoing ADT.