Abstract
Objective
Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), a principal therapy in patients with prostate cancer, is associated with the development of obesity, insulin resistance, and hyperinsulinemia. Recent evidence indicates that metformin may slow cancer progression and improves survival in prostate cancer patients, but the mechanism is not well understood. Circulating insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) are bound to high-affinity binding proteins, which not only modulate the bioavailability and signalling of IGFs but also have independent actions on cell growth and survival. The aim of this study was to investigate whether metformin modulates IGFs, IGF-binding proteins (IGFBPs), and the pregnancy-associated plasma protein A (PAPP-A) – stanniocalcin 2 (STC2) axis.
Design and methods
In a blinded, randomised, cross-over design, 15 patients with prostate cancer on stable ADT received metformin and placebo treatment for 6 weeks each. Glucose metabolism along with circulating IGFs and IGFBPs was assessed.
Results
Metformin significantly reduced the homeostasis model assessment as an index of insulin resistance (HOMA IR) and hepatic insulin resistance. Metformin also reduced circulating IGF-2 (P < 0.05) and IGFBP-3 (P < 0.01) but increased IGF bioactivity (P < 0.05). At baseline, IGF-2 correlated significantly with the hepatic insulin resistance (r2= 0.28, P < 0.05). PAPP-A remained unchanged but STC2 declined significantly (P < 0.05) following metformin administration. During metformin treatment, change in HOMA IR correlated with the change in STC2 (r2= 0.35, P < 0.05).
Conclusion
Metformin administration alters many components of the circulating IGF system, either directly or indirectly via improved insulin sensitivity. Reduction in IGF-2 and STC2 may provide a novel mechanism for a potential metformin-induced antineoplastic effect.
Introduction
Prostate cancer is the most common solid organ cancer in men and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) is a principal therapy. While ADT improves cancer symptoms and survival in prostate cancer patients, because of the induced hypogonadism, it is associated with the development of obesity, insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia, and increased cardiovascular disease risk (1, 2). The metabolic syndrome is present in >50% of men receiving long-term ADT compared to 20% of matched controls (3). Insulin resistance is increased by more than 30% as early as 3 months after the initiation of ADT (4), and the risk of new-onset diabetes is increased four- to five-fold in the first year of treatment (5). These conditions are known to worsen cancer risk and prognosis, partly due to the carcinogenic effects of hyperinsulinemia (6). Thus, in prostate cancer patients on ADT, there are high rates of obesity, hyperinsulinemia, and diabetes development, which may be associated with a poorer cancer prognosis (1, 2).
Chronic hyperinsulinemia may stimulate carcinogenesis either directly through the insulin receptor or indirectly through insulin-like growth factor receptors (IGF-1Rs). Recent evidence indicates that the anti-diabetic drug metformin may slow cancer progression and improve survival in prostate cancer patients (7, 8, 9). Diabetic patients treated with metformin have a significantly reduced risk of cancer, with meta-analysis reporting metformin to be associated with reduction in overall cancer incidence by 31% and cancer mortality by 34% (10), including reduced prostate cancer-specific mortality (7, 8). There are currently several studies underway that evaluate the potential clinical benefit of the addition of metformin to standard therapy for advanced prostate cancer (STAMPEDE trial (NCT00268476), MAST study (NCT01864096), and PRIME study (NCT03031821)). A recent randomised, controlled trial indicated that metformin improves castration-resistant prostate cancer-free survival in patients with prostate cancer (11). To date, however, there is a paucity of studies that explore the mechanisms of the potential anticancer effect of metformin in patients with prostate cancer.
The mechanism of action of metformin remains poorly understood (12). Metformin has been shown to inhibit mitochondrial glycerophosphate dehydrogenase, downregulate androgen receptors, activate AMPK, and suppress the PI3K/AKT pathway which results in the inhibition of the mTOR pathway (13, 14, 15, 16). There is increasing evidence that metformin, by modulating insulin-like growth factors (IGFs) and IGF-binding proteins (IGFBPs), may inhibit cancer proliferation and spread. Recent studies show that metformin inhibits androgen-induced IGF-1R gene transcription in prostate cancer cells (17). In pancreatic cancer, metformin reduces proliferation through the activation of AMPK and inhibition of IGF-1R signalling (13).
The IGFs are mitogenic peptides involved in the regulation of cell proliferation (18). Circulating IGFs originate primarily from the liver; however, they are also produced locally by prostatic stromal cells in response to androgen stimulation, thus increasing epithelial cell proliferation. Epidemiological studies have established a link between high circulating IGF-1 and a greater risk of advanced prostate cancer (19), in which the IGF-1R signalling pathway is upregulated (20). IGFs circulate bound to high-affinity binding proteins, which not only modulate the bioavailability and signalling of IGFs but also have IGF-independent actions on cell growth and survival (21). Therefore, IGF and IGFBPs signalling may drive cancer development and progression (22). IGFBP-2 has been shown to stimulate cancer growth and invasion, whereas IGFBP-3 may exert protective antineoplastic effects (23, 24). Thus, IGFBPs have additional IGF-1-independent effects on cancer.
In determining the role of IGFBPs in cancer development, it is important to consider not only a change in their concentration but also a change in their proteolytic cleavage and hence IGF-binding capacity. There are several factors that regulate IGFBPs cleavage, with pregnancy-associated plasma protein-A (PAPP-A) recently sparking great interest in cancer pathogenesis (25). PAPP-A is a metalloprotease that cleaves several IGFBPs, with IGFBP-4 being the key substrate. The cleavage allows the IGFs to separate from the IGFBPs, which results in an increase in IGF bioactivity (26, 27). Stanniocalcin 2 (STC2) has oncogenic properties (28) and is an inhibitor of PAPP-A reducing its IGFBP-4 proteolytic activity (29). Therefore, STC2 is expected to reduce IGF bioactivity, inhibiting cancer growth. However, many studies show that STC2 has oncogenic properties, many cancers overexpress STC2 and an increased STC2 expression correlates with a poorer prognosis (30). These observations appear to conflict with the role of STC2 as an inhibitor of PAPP-A. However, since STC2 was not previously connected to PAPP-A or the IGF system, they have mostly been studied separately, and the link between STC2 and cancer warrants further investigations. This also illustrates the complexity of the IGF-axis; the activity of the IGFs depends on an intimate relationship between the various components, as further discussed in a recent review (25). Thus, IGFBPs and IGF bioactivity may be modulated via the PAPP-A/STC2 pathway that plays a major role in cancer biology.
There is a paucity of studies that explore the effects of metformin on IGFs/IGFBPs in patients with prostate cancer. Animal studies have shown that metformin reduces total IGF-1 levels and prostate cancer mortality, and a further study in humans reported a decrease in circulating IGF-1 following 12 weeks of metformin treatment (31, 32). In addition, metformin has been reported to alter serum concentrations of the IGFBPs (33, 34, 35) and this makes it difficult to predict the overall impact of metformin on the circulating IGF bioactivity. To the best of our knowledge, there are no studies in prostate cancer that have comprehensively investigated metformin effects on IGFs, IGF bioactivity, IGFBPs, and IGFBP activity modulators. We hypothesise that metformin induces its antineoplastic effect in prostate cancer patients by modulating IGFs and IGFBPs.
Methods
This was a blinded, randomised, controlled cross-over study of metformin treatment in patients with prostate cancer. Men with prostate cancer who were on stable ADT for at least last 6 months were invited to participate in this study. Patients were recruited from the Crown Princess Mary Cancer Centre, Westmead Hospital, and the Blacktown Cancer and Haematology Centre, Blacktown Hospital, Australia. Inclusion criteria were men aged between 50 and 80 years with histologically confirmed prostate cancer of early (localised prostate cancer disease without metastases) or advanced-stage prostate cancer (metastatic prostate cancer with bone involvement only, as patients with visceral metastases tend to have a more aggressive course with a higher chance of progression during the study period and these patients were excluded to ensure the effect of metformin could be tested), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) 0–1 performance status, and on stable treatment with ADT with GnRH analogues for more than 6 months. In our clinics, patients with non-metastatic disease routinely receive ADT as concurrent/adjuvant therapy, in combination with prostate radiation therapy for high-risk prostate cancer.
Exclusion criteria were visceral metastases, castrate-resistant prostate cancer (PSA progression defined as at least 3 PSA rises, measured on three successive occasions ≥ 1 week apart after hormonal treatment), history of confirmed type 1 or type 2 diabetes mellitus or a positive test during screening by an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), current or prior use of metformin or other anti-diabetic drugs within the last year, known hypersensitivity or allergy to metformin or any of its excipients, hypothalamic or pituitary disorders, other forms of malignancies excluding prostate cancer, renal (eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) or hepatic impairment (bilirubin ≥ 1.5× upper limit normal, ALT and ALP ≥ 2.5× upper limit normal), history of lactic acidosis, cardiac or respiratory insufficiency, alcohol abuse, severe infections that are likely to increase the risk of lactic acidosis, and any medications known to cause interference with the endocrine system (excluding ADT). This study was approved by the Western Sydney Local Health District Human Research Ethics Committee. All participants gave informed written consent. The study was registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12615000778583).
Experimental design
Fifteen patients were randomised to receive either metformin or placebo first using a computer random assignment programme. Each treatment was for 6 weeks. Study endpoints were assessed at baseline, after 6 weeks of treatment with metformin and after 6 weeks of placebo, in randomised order. The dose of metformin was 500 mg daily for the first week, increased to 500 mg twice daily for the second week, to a maximum dose of 1500 mg daily from the third week. Safety and drug-related toxicities were evaluated on scheduled visits during trial treatment and weekly phone calls. One patient developed gastrointestinal sideeffects during metformin treatment which required the metformin dose to be increased at a slower pace, achieving target dose at week 4. Another patient developed an ischemic stroke during the placebo treatment phase (after metformin treatment had been completed) and was subsequently withdrawn from the study.
Study endpoints
The primary objective of this study of metformin treatment was to assess a change in the IGF/IGFBP system: IGF-1 and -2, IGF bioactivity, IGFBP-1 to -3, and IGFBP activity modulators PAPP-A and STC2.
Glucose and insulin indices
Glucose metabolism was assessed using the OGTT. Blood glucose and insulin concentrations were measured at baseline and after a 75 g glucose load at 30, 60, 90, and 120 min. Hepatic insulin resistance (the product of total area under the curve for glucose and insulin during the first 30 min) was calculated (36). Homeostasis model assessment as an index of insulin resistance (HOMA IR) was calculated, and overall glucose metabolism was estimated as the incremental glucose and insulin area under the curve above fasting over 120 min.
Body composition and bone mineral density
Lean body mass (LBM) and total and regional fat mass (FM) were assessed by dual x-ray absorptiometry (DXA; GE Healthcare Lunar Prodigy Pro) and Bioeletrical impedance spectroscopy (BIS) using the ImpediMed Ltd SFB7 analyser (ImpediMed Ltd Qld, Pinkenba, Australia) (37). Change in body cell mass (BCM), a functional component of LBM, was estimated by subtracting extracellular water (ECW) from LBM. Vertebral and hip bone mineral density was also measured by DXA at baseline.
Physical activity
Patients were asked to complete an exercise diary for 1 week prior to each visit and to specify the number of hours of light, moderate, or intense physical activity.
Diet
At each visit, patient diet patterns were assessed by a 24-h recall questionnaire using FoodWorks (Xyris Software Pty Ltd, Brisbane, Australia).
Resting energy expenditure and substrate oxidation rates
Carbohydrate and lipid oxidation, as well as resting energy expenditure (REE), were quantified by indirect calorimetry using a metabolic monitor (ParvoMedics, Sandy, Utah) for 20-min periods. The amount of oxygen consumed and carbon dioxide produced is measured, from which substrate oxidation rates are derived. This was done at baseline (after an overnight fast) and 30 and 90 min after the 75 g glucose load.
Bioactive IGF
IGF bioactivity was determined by an in-house kinase receptor activation (KIRA) assay as originally described (38) with modifications (39). In brief, human embryonic kidney HEK 293 cells transfected with the human IGF-1R cDNA were stimulated with patient serum to measure the ability of serum IGF-1 and IGF-2 to activate the IGF-IR in vitro. A serial dilution of rhIGF-1 (WHO 02/254) was used as a calibrator. The binding of IGFs to the IGF-IR and subsequent receptor tyrosine auto-phosphorylation was detected by an anti-phosphotyrosine antibody and quantified by a commercial phospho-IGF-IR ELISA (R&D Systems; Cat# DYC 1770E). The assay signal is referred to as ‘IGF bioactivity’, because the IGF-IR can be activated by IGF-1 as well as IGF-2 to a lesser extent. In our hands, IGF-2 crossreacts with the IGF-1R with a potency being 12% of that of IGF-1, whereas insulin has a negligible cross-reactivity (<1%) (38). The limit of detection was <0.08 µg/L. Intra- and inter-assay CVs were 12 and 20%, respectively.
Biochemical investigations
Blood samples were taken at three time points (baseline, 6, and 12 weeks). At each visit, fasting blood samples were taken and stored at −80°C for analysis. All samples for any individual were measured in the same assay run for each analyte. Serum glucose and insulin were measured using commercial assays. Serum total IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 levels were measured using an IDS-iSYS Multi-Discipline Automated Analyser (Immunodiagnostic Systems Nordic SA, Denmark) as previously published (40, 41). Limit of detection for total IGF-1 and IGFBP-3 was 4.4 and 50 ng/mL, respectively. IGF-2 was measured as previously described (42, 43). In brief, IGF-2 was measured by an in-house time-resolved immunofluorometric assay, using the international IGF-2 standard (WHO 96/538, NIBSC) as a calibrator. Anti-IGF-2 antibody (#05-166 clone S1F2, Merck Millipore) was used for coating and for detection, and an anti-IGF-2 antibody (# I-7276, Sigma) was directly tagged with Europium according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Perkin Elmer Life Sciences) was applied. Intra-assay and inter-assay CVs were 5 and 10%, respectively. IGFBP-1 and -2 were measured by in-house immunoassays, with intra- and inter-assay CVs, respectively, of 8 and 7% for IGFBP-1 and 5 and 12% for IGFBP-2 (39). Serum PAPP-A and STC2 levels were determined by commercial ELISAs (AnshLabs, Texas, USA) as recently described (44).
Statistical analysis
Data were logarithmically transformed for analysis if not normally distributed. The statistical analysis consisted of a paired t-test of change in endpoint and a linear regression analysis was used to investigate associations. To account for the lack of a washout between the placebo and metformin treatment, the effect of sequence of treatment was also sought by unpaired t-test. Results are expressed as mean ± s.e.m. and a P value <0.05 was considered significant. All analysis was conducted using SPSS statistics v22 (IBM corporation).
Results
Baseline characteristics are shown in Table 1.
Baseline characteristics.
| Variable | |
|---|---|
| Age (years) | 70.3 ± 1.6 |
| Weight (kg) | 90.3 ± 3.4 |
| BMI kg/m2 | 31.1 ± 1.1 |
| SBP (mmHg) | 139 ± 5.1 |
| DBP (mmHg) | 68 ± 2.6 |
| Gleason score | |
| 7 (n) | 3 |
| 8 (n) | 4 |
| 9 (n) | 8 |
| Cancer staging | |
| Localised (n) | 3 |
| Biochemical recurrence (n) | 9 |
| Metastatic (n) | 3 |
| PSA (ng/mL) | 0.4 ± 0.3 |
| Lean body mass (kg) | 51.3 ± 1.5 |
| LBM (% body weight) | 57.6 ± 1.4 |
| Fat mass (kg) | 35.2 ± 2.2 |
| Extracellular water (L) | 19.4 ± 0.7 |
| BCM (kg) | 42.1 ± 3.3 |
| Glucose (mmol/L), fasting | 5.1 ± 0.1 |
| Insulin (µU/mL), fasting | 13.9 ± 1.4 |
| Energy consumption/day (kJ) | 8752 ± 978 |
| Light physical activity (h/day) | 4.9 ± 1.0 |
| Moderate physical activity (h/day) | 3.2 ± 1.4 |
| High physical activity (h/day) | 0.2 ± 0.1 |
Data are presented as mean ± s.e.m.
BCM, body cell mass; DBP, diastolic blood pressure; LBM, lean body mass; LH, luteinising hormone; n, number of patients; PSA, prostate-specific antigen; SBP, systolic blood pressure.
There was no significant difference in magnitude of any effect according to the order of treatment.
There was no significant change in plasma concentration of PSA during the study (Table 2). There was no significant change in weight compared to baseline. However, the difference between the treatment periods was statistically significant with a 0.9 ± 0.4 kg lower weight gained following metformin compared to placebo administration (P < 0.05; Table 2). This change in weight was explained by a change in fat mass, with a 1.1 ± 0.4 kg lower fat mass gain following metformin compared to placebo (P < 0.05). Similarly, truncal fat mass differed between the treatment periods, with a 0.9 ± 0.3 kg less gain in truncal fat during metformin treatment (P < 0.05). Carbohydrate oxidation rate measured 30 min after a glucose load was significantly higher during metformin treatment with a group difference of 31 ± 14 mg/min when compared to placebo treatment (P < 0.05). However, no significant change in resting energy expenditure or fat oxidation rates was noted (Table 2).
The effect of metformin on study variables.
| Variable | Baseline | Change vs baseline metformin (n = 15) | Change vs baseline placebo (n = 14) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weight (kg) | 90.3 ± 3.4 | −0.44 ± 0.3 | 0.54 ± 0.4 | 0.02 |
| Fat mass (kg) | 35.2 ± 2.2 | −0.3 ± 0.5 | 0.8 ± 0.3 | 0.03 |
| Fat mass trunk (kg) | 20.2 ± 1.1 | −0.08 ± 0.5 | 0.8 ± 0.5 | 0.02 |
| LBM (kg) | 63.1 ± 1.5 | −0.3 ± 0.5 | −0.4 ± 0.4 | 0.7 |
| REE (kcal/day) | 1595 ± 61 | −88 ± 57 | −80 ± 52 | 0.71 |
| Cox (mg/day) | 55.1 ± 18.4 | 12.3 ± 25.5 | −1.2 ± 18 | 0.72 |
| Change in Cox 30 min after glucose load | 61 ± 6.5 | 20.3 ± 11.8 | −11.3 ± 5.8 | 0.047 |
| Glucose fasting (mmol/L) | 5.2 ± 0.1 | −0.02 ± 0.07 | − 0.03 ± 0.09 | 0.75 |
| Glucose AUC (nmol × 120 min/L) | 863 ± 47 | 54 ± 29 | 24 ± 30 | 0.61 |
| Insulin fasting (pmol/L) | 13.9 ± 1.4 | −2.1 ± 1.2 | −1.1 ± 1.5 | 0.32 |
| Insulin AUC (pmol × 120min/L) | 7313 ± 815 | − 464 ± 686 | 70 ± 723 | 0.24 |
| HOMA IR | 3.2 ± 0.4 | −0.7 ± 0.3a | −0.3 ± 0.4 | 0.16 |
| Hepatic IR | 80.8 ± 12.6 | −16.9 ± 7.9a | −9.9 ± 8.4 | 0.34 |
| Energy consumption (kJ) | 8752 ± 978 | 245 ± 885 | 1227 ± 745 | 0.32 |
| Protein consumption (g) | 103 ± 13.8 | 2.3 ± 13.1 | 13.7 ± 13.4 | 0.41 |
| Fat consumption (g) | 78 ± 11.1 | 0.17 ± 9.8 | 8.3 ± 8 | 0.52 |
| Carbohydrate consumption (g) | 208 ± 21.2 | −0.3 ± 22.7 | 32.4 ± 25.5 | 0.27 |
| PSA (ng/mL) | 0.4 ± 0.3 | 0.2 ± 0.2 | 0.6 ± 0.3 | 0.33 |
| IGF-1 (ng/mL) | 132 ± 7.2 | −0.6 ± 6.4 | 1.9 ± 6.1 | 0.62 |
| IGF bioactivity (ng/mL) | 0.83 ± 0.07 | 0.13 ± 0.07a | 0.06 ± 0.05 | 0.04 |
| IGF-2 (ng/mL) | 584 ± 32.1 | −23.2 ± 12.5b | 1.3 ± 14.2 | 0.12 |
| IGFBP-1 (ng/mL) | 23.4 ± 3.4 | 1.5 ± 2.2 | 2.2 ± 2.5 | 0.64 |
| IGFBP-2 (ng/mL) | 210 ± 16 | −8.3 ± 10.5 | −15.4 ± 8.3 | 0.96 |
| IGFBP-3 (ng/mL) | 3722 ± 216 | −199 ± 95b | 92 ± 55 | 0.002 |
| PAPP-A (ng/mL) | 1.05 ± 0.1 | −0.05 ± 0.04 | −0.02 ± 0.02 | 0.13 |
| STC2 (ng/mL) | 41 ± 2.3 | −2.1 ± 1.0a | −0.5 ± 1.0 | 0.1 |
Data are expressed as mean ± s.e.m; P values represent difference between metformin and placebo effect; bold indicates statistical significance, P < 0.05; a P = 0.05 compared to baseline; b P < 0.07 compared to baseline.
Cox, carbohydrate oxidation rate; IGF, insulin-like growth factor; IGFBP, insulin-like growth factor-binding protein; LBM, lean body mass; PAPP-A, pregnancy-associated plasma protein A; PSA, prostate-specific antigen; REE, resting energy expenditure; STC2, stanniocalcin 2.
There were no significant changes in circulating glucose or insulin, measured in a fasting state or after the glucose load. At baseline, 11 out of 15 patients had HOMA IR > 1.9, indicating the presence of insulin resistance. HOMA IR and hepatic insulin resistance fell significantly (P < 0.05) during metformin treatment compared to baseline (Table 2). There was a significant, positive association between HOMA IR and hepatic insulin resistance at baseline (r2= 0.57, P = 0.001).
There was no significant change in circulating IGF-1, whereas IGF bioactivity increased significantly during metformin treatment (P < 0.05). Circulating IGF-2 fell during metformin treatment, but the change did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.07). However, upon exclusion of one outlier with double levels of IGF-2 compared to rest of the patients, there was a significant reduction in IGF-2 by 29 ± 12 ng/mL during metformin treatment compared to baseline (P = 0.03; Fig. 1A). The individual data of a change in IGF-2 are shown in Supplementary Fig. 1 (see section on supplementary materials given at the end of this article). At baseline, IGF-2 correlated significantly with the hepatic insulin resistance (r2= 0.28, p = 0.04; Fig. 2A). Serum IGFBP-3 fell significantly during metformin treatment, with an average difference of 290 ng/mL (P < 0.01). The change in IGFBP-3 during metformin treatment explained only 16% of the change in IGF bioactivity, which was not statistically significant (P = 0.13). No changes in circulating IGFBP-1 and IGFBP-2 were noted.
Serum IGF-2 (A) and STC2 (B) at baseline and during the treatment with metformin and placebo in patients with prostate cancer on stable androgen deprivation therapy. Data are expressed as means with s.e.m. * P < 0.05 compared to baseline. IGF-2, insulin-like growth factor 2; STC2, stanniocalcin 2.
Citation: Endocrine Connections 11, 4; 10.1530/EC-21-0375
Associations between serum IGF-2 with hepatic insulin resistance at baseline (A) and between the change in serum STC2 and change in HOMA IR during metformin treatment (B) in patients with prostate cancer. IGF-2, insulin-like growth factor 2; STC2, stanniocalcin 2; IR, insulin resistance.
Citation: Endocrine Connections 11, 4; 10.1530/EC-21-0375
There was a significant reduction in circulating STC2 during metformin treatment (P < 0.05, Fig. 1B), whereas PAPP-A remained unchanged. During metformin treatment, change in HOMA IR correlated with the change in STC2 (r2= 0.35, P = 0.02; Fig. 2B). The individual data of a change in STC2 are shown in Supplementary Fig. 2.
Discussion
This study showed that metformin treatment in prostate cancer patients significantly improves insulin resistance, particularly hepatic insulin resistance. There was a reduction in IGF-2 and IGFBP-3, whereas IGF-1 concentration remained unchanged, while IGF bioactivity increased during metformin treatment. Circulating STC2 fell significantly during metformin treatment and correlated significantly with HOMA IR. Thus, we were able to demonstrate that metformin modifies the IGF/IGFBP system and affects circulating STC2 thereby providing insight into the possible mechanisms of metformin action in prostate cancer patients.
An important observation of this study is the reduction in IGF-2 during metformin treatment. IGF signalling drives cancer development and progression (22). IGF-2 shares structural similarity to insulin and in fact is a more potent mitogen than insulin when signalling through IR-A (45). IGF-2 activates the PI3K/Akt and MAPK/ERK signalling pathways (46). IGF-2 loss of imprinting, an epigenetic modification associated with aging, promotes prostate neoplastic development by increasing p-ERK signalling in a mouse model (47). In muscle cells, mTOR stimulates IGF-2 transcription and secretion (46). This is an interesting concept since metformin is a potent inhibitor of mTOR, which may therefore reduce tissue IGF-2 production. In bone marrow-derived multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells, metformin reduces IGF-2 secretion (48). Thus, metformin may inhibit IGF-2 tissue production, in line with our study showing reduction in circulating IGF-2 during metformin administration.
Previous studies have found that circulating IGF-2 is higher by about 15% in people with obesity compared to lean individuals and IGF-2 decreases following weight loss due to caloric restriction or gastric bypass surgery (49, 50, 51, 52, 53). Adipose tissue produces more IGF-2 than IGF-1, with IGF-2 being the highest in the visceral adipose tissue compared to the s.c. adipose tissue (54). This tissue-specific IGF-2 secretion may explain why weight loss may associate with reduction in IGF-2. A recent study revealed that for every mmol/L reduction in fasting plasma glucose, there was a 40 ng/mL reduction in IGF-2 following an 8-week low energy diet (52). Interestingly, there is a diet-induced reduction in IGF-2 and IGFBP-3 but not in IGF-1 (51). The expression of IGF-2 gene in blood cells is significantly higher in obese insulin-resistant compared to obese insulin-sensitive adolescents (55). Insulin has been shown to increase internalisation of IGF-2 receptors, mediating an increase in IGF-2 cellular uptake and consequent degradation (56). Thus, an improvement in insulin action/sensitivity may be linked to a reduction in IGF-2. This is in line with our study where IGF-2 had a positive association with hepatic insulin resistance at baseline and metformin treatment reduced insulin resistance with a parallel reduction in circulating IGF-2. Since IGF-2 not only exerts pro-tumorigenic effects but also increases de novo androgen synthesis in prostate cancer cells (57), metformin-induced inhibition of IGF-2 provides a promising target for the anti-tumour effect of metformin.
This study also shows that during metformin treatment, there is a significant reduction in STC2, which plays a major role in cancer biology. Overexpression of STC2 is associated with cancer progression and can be used as a marker of poor prognosis (58, 59). A recent meta-analysis reports that high STC2 expression in solid cancers can serve as a tumour marker to monitor cancer development and progression (60). STC2 has oncogenic properties in prostate cancer, as overexpression promotes prostate cancer cell growth (28). Thus, STC2 could play a role in aggressive and castration-resistant prostate cancers. The mechanisms by which STC2 controls cancer growth and metastasis could be via the PI3K/AKT/Snail and AKT/ERK signalling pathways (61, 62). STC2 is also an inhibitor of PAPP-A (29), which enhances proteolytic activity of IGFBP-4 (26), upon which IGF-1 gets liberated, leading to increased IGF bioavailability (27). Thus, an increase in IGF bioactivity shown in this study may be partially explained by the reduction in STC2, potentially leaving more PAPP-A in its proteolytically active state. We also show here a significant association between the change in HOMA IR and STC2 during metformin treatment, which indicates that the greater the improvement in insulin sensitivity, the greater the reduction in STC2. This is supported by a recent study showing that following gastric bypass surgery, STC2 decreased and the reduction in STC2 correlated with improvements in fasting glucose, insulin, and HbA1C (53). Because STC2 can directly modify cancer growth and metastasis, the reduction in STC2 associated with metformin treatment may be another plausible mechanism for the antineoplastic effect of metformin.
IGFs circulate bound to high-affinity binding proteins, which modulate the bioavailability of IGFs. Importantly, IGFBPs have independent actions from those of IGFs on cell growth and survival (21). In vitro studies have demonstrated that IGFBP-3 inhibits proliferation, adhesion, invasion, and metastasis of prostate cancer, independent of IGF-1 (63, 64). IGFBP-3 is an inhibitor of MAPK signalling, which is implicated in the development of castrate-resistant prostate cancer (65). It has been also shown that higher serum IGFBP-3 is associated with a lower risk of developing advanced-stage prostate cancer (66). Thus, higher circulating IGFBP-3 would theoretically be an advantage in prostate cancer patients, exerting direct effects on cancer cells as well as reducing IGF bioactivity. However, in this study, we show that metformin therapy reduced circulating IGFBP-3 and increased IGF bioactivity. This is an unexpected finding. However, in vitro studies in other cancer types have demonstrated high levels of IGFBP-3 in cancer cells, with IGFBP-3 stimulating breast cancer growth and being a poor prognostic marker for breast cancer patients (67, 68, 69, 70). Thus, it is difficult to predict how the change in circulating IGFBP-3 due to metformin treatment affects prostate cancer cells.
Research indicates that in the liver, metformin reduces GH-mediated PDK4 expression via SHP repressing hepatic gluconeogenesis (71). It is plausible that metformin may also reduce GH-mediated hepatic IGFBP-3 production. As IGFBP-3 is a principal binding protein not just for the IGF-1 but for the IGF-2 as well (72), reduction in IGF-2 seen in this study may be directly related to a reduction in IGFBP-3. Supportive of this, we neither detect a difference between the groups for the IGF-1 to IGFBP-3 ratio nor there was any significant association between the change in IGFBP-3 and the change in IGF bioactivity during metformin treatment.
An increase in IGF bioactivity may contribute to the whole-body metabolic effects of metformin. An increase in IGF bioactivity is likely to play a role in substrate metabolism and is expected to induce a muscle anabolic effect. Indeed, metformin stimulates protein synthesis in muscle (73). In adipocytes, IGF-1R activation stimulates glucose uptake. This is likely to occur also in brown fat cells, where IGF-1R activation has been shown to be essential for full thermogenic capacity (74). The increase in IGF bioactivity during metformin treatment may therefore result in a stimulation of lipid use in brown adipose tissue as well, thereby inducing increased lipid utilisation and reduction in fat mass. In line with this, we were able to demonstrate a reduction in fat mass associated with metformin treatment. An increase in IGF bioactivity is expected to improve glucose metabolism as well. Evidence comes from studies where IGF-1R deletion in skeletal muscle results in glucose intolerance and impaired insulin action and human studies reveal that IGF-1 administration enhances insulin sensitivity in patients with type 2 diabetes (75, 76, 77). Thus, the increase in IGF bioactivity during metformin administration may facilitate the beneficial effects of metformin on metabolism.
IGF-1R levels have been shown to be decreased by metformin in cell culture studies (17, 78). However, this scenario is very different from the human in vivo situation. Furthermore, we do not expect parallel changes in the ligand (IGF-1) and its receptor. For example, unchanged levels of ligand do not necessarily imply that the receptor IGF-1R remains unchanged or even becomes reduced (as part of a regulated response). The IGF bioactivity estimate represents the final outcome of changes in IGFBPs, PAPP-A, and STC2, as well as other proteases. Given the vast number of factors that regulate IGF bioactivity, we are limited to speculation regarding those factors that are included in this paper. Insulin is able to activate the IGF-1R, but receptor-binding experiments have shown that IGF-1R-binding affinity for IGF-2 and insulin are more than 10 and 200 times, respectively, lower than that for IGF-1. As stated, in our IGF bioactivity assay, cross-reactivity average was 0.8% for human insulin and 12% for IGF-2. Thus, insulin plays minimal role and IGF-2 a much lesser role than IGF-1 in determining IGF-1R activity. If anything, the increase in insulin sensitivity during metformin treatment would correspond to an increase in IGF-1R activity. However, it is difficult to predict what net effect would be seen in prostate cancer cells in response to an increase in circulating IGF bioactivity.
There are limitations to our study. This is a relatively small study, thus meriting confirmation of results in a larger cohort. There was no washout period between the metformin and placebo treatments. However, placebo administration was for 6 weeks before measurement of outcomes, which should have been sufficient to eliminate metformin metabolic effects. Furthermore, we undertook statistical evaluation for the order of treatment and found no effect on the results, providing evidence that there was no sequence effect in this randomised, controlled study. Nevertheless, the lack of the washout period may have reduced the apparent effect size of metformin treatment compared to placebo, if there was some carry-over of metformin action into a subsequent placebo treatment phase. We did not detect any change in PAPP-A concentrations but have to acknowledge that we did not measure its proteolytic activity, which may have increased during metformin treatment. As an increase in PAPP-A results in greater IGFBP-4 cleavage, leading to increased IGF bioactivity (26, 27), it would be of interest to measure enzymatically active PAPP-A and IGFBP-4 in this cohort of prostate cancer patients.
In summary, metformin significantly reduces circulating STC2, IGF-2, IGFBP-3 and increases IGF bioactivity. We conclude that metformin administration alters many components of the circulating IGF system, either directly or indirectly via an improved insulin sensitivity. Reduction in IGF-2 and STC2 is expected to result in reduction in cancer growth and metastasis. This provides a possible mechanism for the proposed anticancer effect of metformin.
Supplementary materials
This is linked to the online version of the paper at https://doi.org/10.1530/EC-21-0375.
Declaration of interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest that could be perceived as prejudicing the impartiality of the research reported.
Funding
This study was supported by the WSLHD Research & Education Network Research Grant Scheme, Australia.
Acknowledgement
The authors greatly thank our study participants.
References
- 1↑
Lam T, Birzniece V, McLean M, Gurney H, Hayden A, Cheema BS. The adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy in prostate cancer and the benefits and potential anti-oncogenic mechanisms of progressive resistance training. Sports Medicine: Open 2020 6 13. (https://doi.org/10.1186/s40798-020-0242-8)
- 2↑
Tzortzis V, Samarinas M, Zachos I, Oeconomou A, Pisters LL, Bargiota A. Adverse effects of androgen deprivation therapy in patients with prostate cancer: focus on metabolic complications. Hormones 2017 16 115–123. (https://doi.org/10.14310/horm.2002.1727)
- 3↑
Braga-Basaria M, Dobs AS, Muller DC, Carducci MA, John M, Egan J, Basaria S. Metabolic syndrome in men with prostate cancer undergoing long-term androgen-deprivation therapy. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2006 24 3979–3983. (https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.05.9741)
- 4↑
Harrington JM, Schwenke DC, Epstein DR, Bailey Jr DE. Androgen-deprivation therapy and metabolic syndrome in men with prostate cancer. Oncology Nursing Forum 2014 41 21–29. (https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.21-29)
- 5↑
Derweesh IH, Diblasio CJ, Kincade MC, Malcolm JB, Lamar KD, Patterson AL, Kitabchi AE, Wake RW. Risk of new-onset diabetes mellitus and worsening glycaemic variables for established diabetes in men undergoing androgen-deprivation therapy for prostate cancer. BJU International 2007 100 1060–1065. (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2007.07184.x)
- 6↑
Scully T, Ettela A, LeRoith D, Gallagher EJ. Obesity, Type 2 diabetes, and cancer risk. Frontiers in Oncology 2020 10 615375. (https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2020.615375)
- 7↑
He K, Hu H, Ye S, Wang H, Cui R, Yi L. The effect of metformin therapy on incidence and prognosis in prostate cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Scientific Reports 2019 9 2218. (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-38285-w)
- 8↑
Margel D, Urbach DR, Lipscombe LL, Bell CM, Kulkarni G, Austin PC, Fleshner N. Metformin use and all-cause and prostate cancer-specific mortality among men with diabetes. Journal of Clinical Oncology 2013 31 3069–3075. (https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2012.46.7043)
- 9↑
Yao X, Liu H, Xu H. The impact of metformin use with survival outcomes in urologic cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BioMed Research International 2021 2021 5311828. (https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/5311828)
- 10↑
Gandini S, Puntoni M, Heckman-Stoddard BM, Dunn BK, Ford L, DeCensi A, Szabo E. Metformin and cancer risk and mortality: a systematic review and meta-analysis taking into account biases and confounders. Cancer Prevention Research 2014 7 867–885. (https://doi.org/10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-13-0424)
- 11↑
Alghandour R, Ebrahim MA, Elshal AM, Ghobrial F, Elzaafarany M, MA EL. Repurposing metformin as anticancer drug: randomized controlled trial in advanced prostate cancer (MANSMED). Urologic Oncology 2021 39 831.e831–831.e810. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urolonc.2021.05.020)
- 12↑
Ben Sahra I, Laurent K, Loubat A, Giorgetti-Peraldi S, Colosetti P, Auberger P, Tanti JF, Le Marchand-Brustel Y, Bost F. The antidiabetic drug metformin exerts an antitumoral effect in vitro and in vivo through a decrease of cyclin D1 level. Oncogene 2008 27 3576–3586. (https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1211024)
- 13↑
Karnevi E, Said K, Andersson R, Rosendahl AH. Metformin-mediated growth inhibition involves suppression of the IGF-I receptor signalling pathway in human pancreatic cancer cells. BMC Cancer 2013 13 235. (https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-13-235)
- 14↑
Clements A, Gao B, Yeap SHO, Wong MKY, Ali SS, Gurney H. Metformin in prostate cancer: two for the price of one. Annals of Oncology 2011 22 2556–2560. (https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdr037)
- 15↑
Akinyeke T, Matsumura S, Wang X, Wu Y, Schalfer ED, Saxena A, Yan W, Logan SK, Li X. Metformin targets c-MYC oncogene to prevent prostate cancer. Carcinogenesis 2013 34 2823–2832. (https://doi.org/10.1093/carcin/bgt307)
- 16↑
Madiraju AK, Erion DM, Rahimi Y, Zhang XM, Braddock DT, Albright RA, Prigaro BJ, Wood JL, Bhanot S & MacDonald MJ et al.Metformin suppresses gluconeogenesis by inhibiting mitochondrial glycerophosphate dehydrogenase. Nature 2014 510 542–546. (https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13270)
- 17↑
Malaguarnera R, Sacco A, Morcavallo A, Squatrito S, Migliaccio A, Morrione A, Maggiolini M, Belfiore A. Metformin inhibits androgen-induced IGF-IR up-regulation in prostate cancer cells by disrupting membrane-initiated androgen signaling. Endocrinology 2014 155 1207–1221. (https://doi.org/10.1210/en.2013-1925)
- 18↑
Djavan B, Waldert M, Seitz C, Marberger M. Insulin-like growth factors and prostate cancer. World Journal of Urology 2001 19 225–233. (https://doi.org/10.1007/s003450100220)
- 19↑
Wolk A, Mantzoros CS, Andersson SO, Bergstrom R, Signorello LB, Lagiou P, Adami HO, Trichopoulos D. Insulin-like growth factor 1 and prostate cancer risk: a population-based, case-control study. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 1998 90 911–915. (https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/90.12.911)
- 20↑
Hellawell GO, Turner GD, Davies DR, Poulsom R, Brewster SF, Macaulay VM. Expression of the type 1 insulin-like growth factor receptor is up-regulated in primary prostate cancer and commonly persists in metastatic disease. Cancer Research 2002 62 2942–2950.
- 21↑
Baxter RC IGF binding proteins in cancer: mechanistic and clinical insights. Nature Reviews: Cancer 2014 14 329–341. (https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc3720)
- 22↑
Uzoh CC, Holly JM, Biernacka KM, Persad RA, Bahl A, Gillatt D, Perks CM. Insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-2 promotes prostate cancer cell growth via IGF-dependent or -independent mechanisms and reduces the efficacy of docetaxel. British Journal of Cancer 2011 104 1587–1593. (https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.127)
- 23↑
Ho PJ, Baxter RC. Insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-2 in patients with prostate carcinoma and benign prostatic hyperplasia. Clinical Endocrinology 1997 46 333–342.
- 24↑
Kiyama S, Morrison K, Zellweger T, Akbari M, Cox M, Yu D, Miyake H, Gleave ME. Castration-induced increases in insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 2 promotes proliferation of androgen-independent human prostate LNCaP tumors. Cancer Research 2003 63 3575–3584.
- 25↑
Frystyk J, Teran E, Gude MF, Bjerre M, Hjortebjerg R. Pregnancy-associated plasma proteins and stanniocalcin-2 – novel players controlling IGF-I physiology. Growth Hormone and IGF Research 2020 53–54 101330. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ghir.2020.101330)
- 26↑
Hjortebjerg R, Lindberg S, Hoffmann S, Jensen JS, Oxvig C, Bjerre M, Frystyk J. PAPP-A and IGFBP-4 fragment levels in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction treated with heparin and PCI. Clinical Biochemistry 2015 48 322–328. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2014.11.022)
- 27↑
Thomsen J, Hjortebjerg R, Espelund U, Ortoft G, Vestergaard P, Magnusson NE, Conover CA, Tramm T, Hager H & Hogdall C et al.PAPP-A proteolytic activity enhances IGF bioactivity in ascites from women with ovarian carcinoma. Oncotarget 2015 6 32266–32278. (https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.5010)
- 28↑
Tamura K, Furihata M, Chung SY, Uemura M, Yoshioka H, Iiyama T, Ashida S, Nasu Y, Fujioka T & Shuin T et al.Stanniocalcin 2 overexpression in castration-resistant prostate cancer and aggressive prostate cancer. Cancer Science 2009 100 914–919. (https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1349-7006.2009.01117.x)
- 29↑
Jepsen MR, Kloverpris S, Mikkelsen JH, Pedersen JH, Fuchtbauer EM, Laursen LS, Oxvig C. Stanniocalcin-2 inhibits mammalian growth by proteolytic inhibition of the insulin-like growth factor axis. Journal of Biological Chemistry 2015 290 3430–3439. (https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M114.611665)
- 30↑
Joshi AD New insights Into physiological and pathophysiological functions of stanniocalcin 2. Frontiers in Endocrinology 2020 11 172. (https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2020.00172)
- 31↑
Xu H, Hu MB, Bai PD, Zhu WH, Ding Q, Jiang HW. Will metformin postpone high-fat diet promotion of TRAMP mouse prostate cancer development and progression? International Urology and Nephrology 2014 46 2327–2334. (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-014-0823-x)
- 32↑
Rothermundt C, Hayoz S, Templeton AJ, Winterhalder R, Strebel RT, Bartschi D, Pollak M, Lui L, Endt K & Schiess R et al.Metformin in chemotherapy-naive castration-resistant prostate cancer: a multicenter phase 2 trial (SAKK 08/09). European Urology 2014 66 468–474. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2013.12.057)
- 33↑
Pawelczyk L, Spaczynski RZ, Banaszewska B, Duleba AJ. Metformin therapy increases insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 in hyperinsulinemic women with polycystic ovary syndrome. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology 2004 113 209–213. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2003.09.031)
- 34↑
Kang HS, Cho HC, Lee JH, Oh GT, Koo SH, Park BH, Lee IK, Choi HS, Song DK, Im SS. Metformin stimulates IGFBP-2 gene expression through PPARalpha in diabetic states. Scientific Reports 2016 6 23665. (https://doi.org/10.1038/srep23665)
- 35↑
El-Haggar SM, El-Shitany NA, Mostafa MF, El-Bassiouny NA. Metformin may protect nondiabetic breast cancer women from metastasis. Clinical and Experimental Metastasis 2016 33 339–357. (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10585-016-9782-1)
- 36↑
Abdul-Ghani MA, Matsuda M, Balas B, DeFronzo RA. Muscle and liver insulin resistance indexes derived from the oral glucose tolerance test. Diabetes Care 2007 30 89–94. (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc06-1519)
- 37↑
Birzniece V, Khaw CH, Nelson AE, Meinhardt U, Ho KK. A critical evaluation of bioimpedance spectroscopy analysis in estimating body composition during GH treatment: comparison with bromide dilution and dual X-ray absorptiometry. European Journal of Endocrinology 2015 172 21–28. (https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-14-0660)
- 38↑
Chen JW, Ledet T, Orskov H, Jessen N, Lund S, Whittaker J, De Meyts P, Larsen MB, Christiansen JS, Frystyk J. A highly sensitive and specific assay for determination of IGF-I bioactivity in human serum. American Journal of Physiology: Endocrinology and Metabolism 2003 284 E1149–E1155. (https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpendo.00410.2002)
- 39↑
Reinhard M, Frystyk J, Jespersen B, Bjerre M, Christiansen JS, Flyvbjerg A, Ivarsen P. Effect of hyperinsulinemia during hemodialysis on the insulin-like growth factor system and inflammatory biomarkers: a randomized open-label crossover study. BMC Nephrology 2013 14 80. (https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2369-14-80)
- 40↑
Bidlingmaier M, Friedrich N, Emeny RT, Spranger J, Wolthers OD, Roswall J, Koerner A, Obermayer-Pietsch B, Hübener C & Dahlgren J et al.Reference intervals for insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) from birth to senescence: results from a multicenter study using a new automated chemiluminescence IGF-1 immunoassay conforming to recent international recommendations. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 2014 99 1712–1721. (https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2013-3059)
- 41↑
Friedrich N, Wolthers OD, Arafat AM, Emeny RT, Spranger J, Roswall J, Kratzsch J, Grabe HJ, Hübener C & Pfeiffer AFH et al.Age- and sex-specific reference intervals across life span for insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 (IGFBP-3) and the IGF-I to IGFBP-3 ratio measured by new automated chemiluminescence assays. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 2014 99 1675–1686. (https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2013-3060)
- 42↑
Frystyk J, Dinesen B, Orskov H. Non-competitive time-resolved immunofluorometric assays for determination of human insulin-like growth factor I and II. Growth Regulation 1995 5 169–176.
- 43↑
Birzniece V, Magnusson NE, Ho KKY, Frystyk J. Effects of raloxifene and estrogen on bioactive IGF1 in GH-deficient women. European Journal of Endocrinology 2014 170 375–383. (https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-13-0835)
- 44↑
Hjortebjerg R, Rasmussen LM, Gude MF, Irmukhamedov A, Riber LP, Frystyk J, De Mey JGR. Local IGF bioactivity associates with high PAPP-A activity in the pericardial cavity of cardiovascular disease patients. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 2020 105 dgaa617. (https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgaa617)
- 45↑
Morcavallo A, Genua M, Palummo A, Kletvikova E, Jiracek J, Brzozowski AM, Iozzo RV, Belfiore A, Morrione A. Insulin and insulin-like growth factor II differentially regulate endocytic sorting and stability of insulin receptor isoform A. Journal of Biological Chemistry 2012 287 11422–11436. (https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M111.252478)
- 46↑
Erbay E, Park IH, Nuzzi PD, Schoenherr CJ, Chen J. IGF-II transcription in skeletal myogenesis is controlled by mTOR and nutrients. Journal of Cell Biology 2003 163 931–936. (https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200307158)
- 47↑
Damaschke NA, Yang B, Bhusari S, Avilla M, Zhong W, Blute Jr ML, Huang W, Jarrard DF. Loss of Igf2 gene imprinting in murine prostate promotes widespread neoplastic growth. Cancer Research 2017 77 5236–5247. (https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-3089)
- 48↑
Smieszek A, Czyrek A, Basinska K, Trynda J, Skaradzinska A, Siudzinska A, Maredziak M, Marycz K. Effect of metformin on viability, morphology, and ultrastructure of mouse bone marrow-derived multipotent mesenchymal stromal cells and Balb/3T3 embryonic fibroblast cell line. BioMed Research International 2015 2015 769402. (https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/769402)
- 49↑
Frystyk J, Skjaerbaek C, Vestbo E, Fisker S, Orskov H. Circulating levels of free insulin-like growth factors in obese subjects: the impact of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews 1999 15 314–322. (https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1520-7560(199909/10)15:5<314::aid-dmrr56>3.0.co;2-e)
- 50↑
Jeyaratnaganthan N, Hojlund K, Kroustrup JP, Larsen JF, Bjerre M, Levin K, Beck-Nielsen H, Frago S, Hassan AB & Flyvbjerg A et al.Circulating levels of insulin-like growth factor-II/mannose-6-phosphate receptor in obesity and type 2 diabetes. Growth Hormone and IGF Research 2010 20 185–191. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ghir.2009.12.005)
- 51↑
Belobrajdic DP, Frystyk J, Jeyaratnaganthan N, Espelund U, Flyvbjerg A, Clifton PM, Noakes M. Moderate energy restriction-induced weight loss affects circulating IGF levels independent of dietary composition. European Journal of Endocrinology 2010 162 1075–1082. (https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-10-0062)
- 52↑
Lee KL, Silvestre MP, AlSaud NH, Fogelholm M, Raben A, Poppitt SD. Investigating IGF-II and IGF2R serum markers as predictors of body weight loss following an 8-week acute weight loss intervention: PREVIEW sub-study. Obesity Research and Clinical Practice 2021 15 42–48. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orcp.2020.12.007)
- 53↑
Hjortebjerg R, Bojsen-Moller KN, Soeby M, Oxvig C, Madsbad S, Frystyk J. Metabolic improvement after gastric bypass correlates with changes in IGF-regulatory proteins stanniocalcin-2 and IGFBP-4. Metabolism: Clinical and Experimental 2021 124 154886. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metabol.2021.154886)
- 54↑
Gude MF, Hjortebjerg R, Oxvig C, Thyo AA, Magnusson NE, Bjerre M, Pedersen SB, Frystyk J, PAPP A. PAPP-A, IGFBP-4 and IGF-II are secreted by human adipose tissue cultures in a depot-specific manner. European Journal of Endocrinology 2016 175 509–519. (https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-16-0569)
- 55↑
Minchenko DO, Tsymbal DO, Davydov VV, Minchenko OH. Expression of genes encoding IGF1, IGF2, and IGFBPs in blood of obese adolescents with insulin resistance. Endocrine Regulations 2019 53 34–45. (https://doi.org/10.2478/enr-2019-0005)
- 56↑
Oka Y, Rozek LM, Czech MP. Direct demonstration of rapid insulin-like growth factor II receptor internalization and recycling in rat adipocytes. Insulin stimulates 125I-insulin-like growth factor II degradation by modulating the IGF-II receptor recycling process. Journal of Biological Chemistry 1985 260 9435–9442.
- 57↑
Lubik AA, Gunter JH, Hollier BG, Ettinger S, Fazli L, Stylianou N, Hendy SC, Adomat HH, Gleave ME & Pollak M et al.IGF2 increases de novo steroidogenesis in prostate cancer cells. Endocrine-Related Cancer 2013 20 173–186. (https://doi.org/10.1530/ERC-12-0250)
- 58↑
He H, Qie S, Guo Q, Chen S, Zou C, Lu T, Su Y, Zong J, Xu H & He D et al.Stanniocalcin 2 (STC2) expression promotes post-radiation survival, migration and invasion of nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells. Cancer Management and Research 2019 11 6411–6424. (https://doi.org/10.2147/CMAR.S197607)
- 59↑
Na SS, Aldonza MB, Sung HJ, Kim YI, Son YS, Cho S, Cho JY. Stanniocalcin-2 (STC2): a potential lung cancer biomarker promotes lung cancer metastasis and progression. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 2015 1854 668–676. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbapap.2014.11.002)
- 60↑
Hu L, Zha Y, Kong F, Pan Y. Prognostic value of high stanniocalcin 2 expression in solid cancers: a meta-analysis. Medicine 2019 98 e17432. (https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000017432)
- 61↑
Yang S, Ji Q, Chang B, Wang Y, Zhu Y, Li D, Huang C, Wang Y, Sun G & Zhang L et al.STC2 promotes head and neck squamous cell carcinoma metastasis through modulating the PI3K/AKT/Snail signaling. Oncotarget 2017 8 5976–5991. (https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.13355)
- 62↑
Chen B, Zeng X, He Y, Wang X, Liang Z, Liu J, Zhang P, Zhu H, Xu N, Liang S. STC2 promotes the epithelial-mesenchymal transition of colorectal cancer cells through AKT-ERK signaling pathways. Oncotarget 2016 7 71400–71416. (https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.12147)
- 63↑
Ingermann AR, Yang YF, Han J, Mikami A, Garza AE, Mohanraj L, Fan L, Idowu M, Ware JL & Kim HS et al.Identification of a novel cell death receptor mediating IGFBP-3-induced anti-tumor effects in breast and prostate cancer. Journal of Biological Chemistry 2010 285 30233–30246. (https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M110.122226)
- 64↑
Mehta HH, Gao Q, Galet C, Paharkova V, Wan J, Said J, Sohn JJ, Lawson G, Cohen P & Cobb LJ et al.IGFBP-3 is a metastasis suppression gene in prostate cancer. Cancer Research 2011 71 5154–5163. (https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-4513)
- 65↑
Mukherjee R, McGuinness DH, McCall P, Underwood MA, Seywright M, Orange C, Edwards J. Upregulation of MAPK pathway is associated with survival in castrate-resistant prostate cancer. British Journal of Cancer 2011 104 1920–1928. (https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.163)
- 66↑
Chan JM, Stampfer MJ, Ma J, Gann P, Gaziano JM, Pollak M, Giovannucci E. Insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) and IGF binding protein-3 as predictors of advanced-stage prostate cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2002 94 1099–1106. (https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/94.14.1099)
- 67↑
Martin JL, Weenink SM, Baxter RC. Insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3 potentiates epidermal growth factor action in MCF-10A mammary epithelial cells. Involvement of p44/42 and P38 mitogen-activated protein kinases. Journal of Biological Chemistry 2003 278 2969–2976. (https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M210739200)
- 68↑
Butt AJ, Martin JL, Dickson KA, McDougall F, Firth SM, Baxter RC. Insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 expression is associated with growth stimulation of T47D human breast cancer cells: the role of altered epidermal growth factor signaling. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 2004 89 1950–1956. (https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2003-030914)
- 69↑
Sheen-Chen SM, Zhang H, Huang CC, Tang RP. Insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3 in breast cancer: analysis with tissue microarray. Anticancer Research 2009 29 1131–1135.
- 70↑
Rocha RL, Hilsenbeck SG, Jackson JG, VanDenBerg CL, Weng Cn, Lee AV, Yee D. Insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 and insulin receptor substrate-1 in breast cancer: correlation with clinical parameters and disease-free survival. Clinical Cancer Research 1997 3 103–109.
- 71↑
Kim YD, Kim YH, Tadi S, Yu JH, Yim YH, Jeoung NH, Shong M, Hennighausen L, Harris RA & Lee IK et al.Metformin inhibits growth hormone-mediated hepatic PDK4 gene expression through induction of orphan nuclear receptor small heterodimer partner. Diabetes 2012 61 2484–2494. (https://doi.org/10.2337/db11-1665)
- 72↑
Ranke MB Insulin-like growth factor binding-protein-3 (IGFBP-3) Best Practice and Research: Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 2015 29 701–711. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beem.2015.06.003)
- 73↑
Gore DC, Wolf SE, Sanford A, Herndon DN, Wolfe RR. Influence of metformin on glucose intolerance and muscle catabolism following severe burn injury. Annals of Surgery 2005 241 334–342. (https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000152013.23032.d1)
- 74↑
Viana-Huete V, Guillen C, Garcia-Aguilar A, Garcia G, Fernandez S, Kahn CR, Benito M. Essential role of IGFIR in the onset of male brown fat thermogenic function: regulation of glucose homeostasis by differential organ-specific insulin sensitivity. Endocrinology 2016 157 1495–1511. (https://doi.org/10.1210/en.2015-1623)
- 75↑
Fernandez AM, Kim JK, Yakar S, Dupont J, Hernandez-Sanchez C, Castle AL, Filmore J, Shulman GI, Le Roith D. Functional inactivation of the IGF-I and insulin receptors in skeletal muscle causes type 2 diabetes. Genes and Development 2001 15 1926–1934. (https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.908001)
- 76↑
Moses AC, Young SC, Morrow LA, O'Brien M, Clemmons DR. Recombinant human insulin-like growth factor I increases insulin sensitivity and improves glycemic control in type II diabetes. Diabetes 1996 45 91–100. (https://doi.org/10.2337/diab.45.1.91)
- 77↑
Clemmons DR, Moses AC, Sommer A, Jacobson W, Rogol AD, Sleevi MR, Allan G. Rh/IGF-I/rhIGFBP-3 administration to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus reduces insulin requirements while also lowering fasting glucose. Growth Hormone and IGF Research 2005 15 265–274. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ghir.2005.05.002)
- 78↑
Kato H, Sekine Y, Furuya Y, Miyazawa Y, Koike H, Suzuki K. Metformin inhibits the proliferation of human prostate cancer PC-3 cells via the downregulation of insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 2015 461 115–121. (https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2015.03.178)
