Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 398

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mortality After Incident Cancer in People With and Without Type 2 Diabetes

Open access
Currie, Craig J., Poole, Chris D., Jenkins-Jones, Sara, Gale, Edwin A.M., Johnson, Jeffrey A., Morgan, Christopher Ll.·2012·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Type 2 diabetes is associated with an increased risk of several types of cancer and with reduced survival after cancer diagnosis. We examined the hypotheses that survival after a diagnosis of solid-tumor cancer is reduced in those with diabetes when compared with those without diabetes, and that treatment with metformin influences survival after cancer diagnosis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were obtained from >350 U.K. primary care practices in a retrospective cohort study. All individuals with or without diabetes who developed a first tumor after January 1990 were identified and records were followed to December 2009. Diabetes was further stratified by treatment regimen. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare all-cause mortality from all cancers and from specific cancers. RESULTS: Of 112,408 eligible individuals, 8,392 (7.5%) had type 2 diabetes. Cancer mortality was increased in those with diabetes, compared with those without (hazard ratio 1.09 [95% CI 1.06–1.13]). Mortality was increased in those with breast (1.32 [1.17–1.49]) and prostate cancer (1.19 [1.08–1.31]) but decreased in lung cancer (0.84 [0.77–0.92]). When analyzed by diabetes therapy, mortality was increased relative to nondiabetes in those on monotherapy with sulfonylureas (1.13 [1.05–1.21]) or insulin (1.13 [1.01–1.27]) but reduced in those on metformin monotherapy (0.85 [0.78–0.93]). CONCLUSIONS: This study confirmed that type 2 diabetes was associated with poorer prognosis after incident cancer, but that the association varied according to diabetes therapy and cancer site. Metformin was associated with survival benefit both in comparison with other treatments for diabetes and in comparison with a nondiabetic population.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2337/dc11-1313

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 16 references

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Zhang, 2010, Validation of cancer diagnoses recorded in the General Practice Research Database, Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf, 19, S1

Cited by

See all 398

Metadata

Authors
Currie, C. J., Poole, C. D., Jenkins-Jones, S., Gale, E. A. M., Johnson, J. A., & Morgan, C. L.
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
2012-01-16
Volume
35
Issue
2
Pages
299-304
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2098167876
Cited by
398
References
16
FWCI
21.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Mortality After Incident Cancer in People With and Without Type 2 Diabetes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/dc11-1313
The paper
Currie, C. J., Poole, C. D., Jenkins-Jones, S., Gale, E. A. M., Johnson, J. A., & Morgan, C. L. (2012). Mortality After Incident Cancer in People With and Without Type 2 Diabetes. Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc11-1313

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.