ICEECE2012 Poster Presentations Diabetes (248 abstracts)
1Community Health Centre, Ljubljana, Slovenia; 2Institute of Oncology, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Background and aims: In vitro studies on breast cancer cell lines showed that the serum of diabetic patients was stronger mitogenic when using glargine as compared to other types of insulin. The aim of this retrospective study was to examine if the patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) using insulin glargine have a higher tumor stage of breast carcinoma in comparison to patients using other types of insulin.
Patients and Methods: Altogether 174 patients were surgically treated because of breast carcinoma in our institution from 20062010. A chart review of 174 patients with DM was performed and the object of this study were 55 breast carcinoma female patients (mean age 67.4 years; range 3886 years), who were on insulin. Insulin glargine was used in 10 patients, while the other 45 patients were on other types of insulin. The data on clinical and histopathology characteristics (age, BMI, TNM tumor stage, number of metastatic lymph nodes, presence of estrogen and progesterone receptors, HER-2 expression) were collected. Clinical and histopathology characteristics of patients on glargine versus other types of insulin were compared by chi-square test and non-parametric statistical analysis.
Results: Mean tumor size was 2.8 cm. TNM tumor stage at diagnosis was not higher among patients on glargine compared to patients on other types of insulin (T1/T2 87 vs 69%, T3/T4 13 vs 31%, P=0.29; N1 53 vs 50%, P=0.85; M1 2 vs 0% respectively). No significant differences between both study groups were found in age of patients, BMI, tumor histology, grade, number of metastatic lymph nodes, hormone receptors or Her-2 status.
Conclusion: We could not show that the patients with diabetes mellitus using insulin glargine have a higher tumor stage of breast carcinoma in comparison to those using other types of insulin.
Declaration of interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research project.
Funding: This work was supported, however funding details unavailable.