We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Review
Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled clinical trial evidence refutes relationship between pharmacotherapy with angiotensin-receptor blockers and an increased risk of cancer.
European Journal of Internal Medicine 2019 June
AIMS: The potential influence of angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) on carcinogenesis is a much-debated topic. Both observational, as well as preclinical studies in rodent carcinogenic assays, suggest a major role of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone-System (RAAS) in cancer development. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis with available study data on ARBs and carcinogenicity in general as primary outcome were conducted. Secondary outcomes were defined as tumour-specific mortality rates and the frequency of new cases of specific tumour types with particular emphasis on lung, breast, and prostate cancer.
METHODS: A systematic literature research was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and TOXLINE. We used a combination of MeSH terms, keywords and substance names of ARBs and searched between 1950 and 2016. At least 100 participants in each study arm and a minimum follow-up for one year were necessary for study inclusion. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated by a random-effects model.
RESULTS: A total of 8818 potentially eligible publications were identified of whom seven randomised controlled trials, four case-control studies and one cohort study met our inclusion criteria. As a key result, we found no effect on carcinogenesis in randomised controlled trials for ARB usage. (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87-1.19; p = .803). Conflicting results with observational studies could be explained by poor reporting- and study qualities.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of our meta-analysis focusing only on high evidence levels and study designs (RCTs) did not reveal any relationship between pharmacotherapy with an ARB and an increased risk for cancer in general.
METHODS: A systematic literature research was performed in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and TOXLINE. We used a combination of MeSH terms, keywords and substance names of ARBs and searched between 1950 and 2016. At least 100 participants in each study arm and a minimum follow-up for one year were necessary for study inclusion. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated by a random-effects model.
RESULTS: A total of 8818 potentially eligible publications were identified of whom seven randomised controlled trials, four case-control studies and one cohort study met our inclusion criteria. As a key result, we found no effect on carcinogenesis in randomised controlled trials for ARB usage. (OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87-1.19; p = .803). Conflicting results with observational studies could be explained by poor reporting- and study qualities.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of our meta-analysis focusing only on high evidence levels and study designs (RCTs) did not reveal any relationship between pharmacotherapy with an ARB and an increased risk for cancer in general.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app