OBJECTIVE

The link between diabetes and prostate cancer is rarely studied in Asians.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The trend of age-standardized prostate cancer incidence in 1995–2006 in the Taiwanese general population was calculated. A random sample of 1,000,000 subjects covered by the National Health Insurance in 2005 was recruited. A total of 494,630 men for all ages and 204,741 men ≥40 years old and without prostate cancer at the beginning of 2003 were followed to the end of 2005. Cumulative incidence and risk ratio between diabetic and nondiabetic men were calculated. Logistic regression estimated the adjusted odds ratios for risk factors.

RESULTS

The trend of prostate cancer incidence increased significantly (P < 0.0001). The cumulative incidence markedly increased with age in either the diabetic or nondiabetic men. The respective risk ratio (95% CI) for all ages and age 40–64, 65–74, and ≥75 years was 5.83 (5.10–6.66), 2.09 (1.60–2.74), 1.35 (1.07–1.71), and 1.39 (1.12–1.71). In logistic regression for all ages or for age ≥40 years, age, diabetes, nephropathy, ischemic heart disease, dyslipidemia, living region, and occupation were significantly associated with increased risk, but medications including insulin and oral antidiabetic agents were not.

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate cancer incidence is increasing in Taiwan. A positive link between diabetes and prostate cancer is observed, which is more remarkable in the youngest age of 40–64 years. The association between prostate cancer and comorbidities commonly seen in diabetic patients suggests a more complicated scenario in the link between prostate cancer and diabetes at different disease stages.

The association between diabetes and prostate cancer has been inconsistently reported, even though two meta-analyses suggested that diabetic patients have a lower risk of prostate cancer of 9% (1) and 16% (2), respectively.

While the two meta-analyses were examined, many studies were case-control and only three focused on the follow-up of cohorts of diabetic patients (35). Among the three cohorts, the cases of prostate cancer were 9 (3), 498 (4), and 2,455 (5), respectively; and only the last (5) showed a significant 9% risk reduction in diabetic patients. Except for the first study being conducted in residents with diabetes in Rochester, Minnesota (3), the diabetic patients in the other two were from hospitalized patients in Denmark (4) and Sweden (5), respectively. The meta-analyses have limitations including a mixture of case-control and cohort designs, a mixture of incident and dead cases, a small number of prostate cancer in most studies, and different sources of subjects with potential selection bias. Although the contamination of type 1 diabetes is possibly minimal because >90% of overall patients have type 2 diabetes, residual confounding could not be excluded if the two types of diabetes are not differentiated.

Although some recent studies still suggested a lower risk of prostate cancer in diabetic patients including Caucasians (6,7), Iranians (8), Israelis (9), African Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Japanese Americans (6), the lower risk in African Americans and Native Hawaiians (6) was not significant. Two Japanese studies did not find any significant association (10,11). The Ohsaki Cohort Study suggested that diabetes was not predictive for total prostate cancer, but diabetic patients did show a higher risk of advanced cancer (11).

Because diabetic patients are prone to develop cancer involving pancreas, liver, breast, colorectum, bladder, and endometrium (1215) and the protective effect of diabetes on prostate cancer requires confirmation, this study evaluated the possible link between diabetes and prostate cancer, and the potential risk factors, by using the reimbursement database of the National Health Insurance (NHI) in Taiwan.

Study population

According to the Ministry of Interior, >98.0% of the Taiwanese population in 2005 (22,770,383: 11,562,440 men and 11,207,943 women) were covered by the NHI (16). A random sample of 1,000,000 subjects covered by the NHI in 2005 was created by the National Health Research Institute. The reimbursement databases were available back to 1996. Identification number, sex, birth date, and diagnostic codes based on the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) were retrieved. Diabetes was coded 250.1–250.9, and prostate cancer was coded 185.

Because prostate cancer is rare in young men, we analyzed the data for all ages and for those aged ≥40 years in the following groups: 40–64, 65–74, and ≥75 years (case number of prostate cancer was too small for age <40 years). Figure 1 shows a flowchart for selecting cases for the study. After excluding women, type 1 diabetes (in Taiwan, patients with type 1 diabetes were issued a “Severe Morbidity Card” after certified diagnosis), living region unknown, and prostate cancer diagnosed before 2003, 494,630 men for all ages and 204,741 men ≥40 years old and without prostate cancer were followed from the beginning of 2003 to the end of 2005.

Figure 1

Flowchart showing the procedures in the calculation of 3-year cumulative incidence of prostate cancer from 2003 to 2005.

Figure 1

Flowchart showing the procedures in the calculation of 3-year cumulative incidence of prostate cancer from 2003 to 2005.

Statistical analyses

The trends of crude and age-standardized (to the 2000 World Health Organization [WHO] population) incidence of prostate cancer in 1995–2006 in the general population were first calculated from the Taiwan Cancer Registry database (17). Linear regression evaluated whether the trends changed significantly, where the incidence was the dependent and the calendar year the independent variable.

The age-specific cumulative incidences from 2003 to 2005 in diabetic and nondiabetic men were calculated for all ages and age 40–64, 65–74, and ≥75 years. The numerator was the number of patients with a first diagnosis of prostate cancer within 2003–2005; and the denominator was the number of insurants in that specific age. The risk ratio between diabetic and nondiabetic men was calculated, and the 95% CI was estimated by Taylor series approximation (18). To minimize the possibility that diabetes might be caused by prostate cancer during a different period, several lag time sensitivity analyses were performed by excluding patients with diabetes duration of <1, <3, and <5 years.

In Taiwan, the National Health Research Institute recommends yearly screening of prostate cancer by digital rectal examination and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) determination for men aged ≥50 years or ≥45 years for those with a family history. The PSA cutoff is set at 4.0 ng/mL. If either examination is abnormal, prostate biopsy guided by transrectal ultrasonography is recommended. The cancer detection rate under this guideline was much lower in Taiwan (0.96–1.3%) than in the Western countries (3–5%); and population-based PSA screening program is not considered as cost effective (19). Therefore PSA test is not paid by the NHI when used for screening purpose in clinical practice. To evaluate whether the use of PSA test differed between those with and without diabetes, χ2 test compared the frequency of PSA test in 2003–2005 by diabetes status among men for all ages and for age ≥40 years.

Logistic regression calculated the adjusted odds ratios (ORs). Prostate cancer was the dependent variable, and the independent variables included age (<40, 40–64, 65–74, and ≥75 years), diabetes duration (nondiabetes, <1, 1–3, 3–5, and ≥5 years), comorbidities, medications, living region, and occupation. The comorbidities (ICD-9-CM codes) included hypertension (401–405), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (490–496, a surrogate for smoking), stroke (430–438), nephropathy (580–589), ischemic heart disease (410–414), peripheral arterial disease (250.7, 785.4, 443.81, 440–448), eye disease (250.5, 362.0, 369, 366.41, 365.44), obesity (278), and dyslipidemia (272.0–272.4). Medications included statin, fibrate, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and/or angiotensin receptor blocker, calcium channel blocker, sulfonylurea, metformin, insulin, acarbose, pioglitazone, and rosiglitazone. Comorbidities and medications were counted only as they appeared before 2003 to assure temporal correctness of cause and effect (prostate cancer). The NHI insurants were classified according to occupation, and this served as a surrogate for socioeconomic status. The living region served as a surrogate for geographical distribution of some environmental exposure. Occupation was categorized as follows: I: civil servants, teachers, employees of governmental or private business, professionals, and technicians; II: people without particular employers, self-employed, or seamen; III: farmers or fishermen; and IV: low-income families supported by social welfare or veterans. Living region was categorized as Taipei, Northern, Central, Southern, and Kao-Ping and Eastern. The regressions were performed for all ages and for age ≥40 years, separately. Because earlier analyses showed a significantly higher frequency of PSA test in the diabetic patients, additional logistic models were created by including PSA test as an additional independent variable to control for its potential confounding effect.

Analyses were conducted using SAS statistical software, version 9.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC). Data were expressed as mean (SD) for continuous variables or number (%) for categorical variables. P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant.

Figure 2 shows the crude and age-standardized incidence trends in the general population. Both are increasing significantly (P < 0.0001).

Figure 2

Trends of prostate cancer incidence in the general population of Taiwan from 1995 to 2006 (♦, crude rate; , age-standardized rate using the 2000 WHO population as referent). (A high-quality color representation of this figure is available in the online issue.)

Figure 2

Trends of prostate cancer incidence in the general population of Taiwan from 1995 to 2006 (♦, crude rate; , age-standardized rate using the 2000 WHO population as referent). (A high-quality color representation of this figure is available in the online issue.)

Table 1 shows the 3-year cumulative incidences and the risk ratios between the diabetic and nondiabetic men in different ages. The cumulative incidence markedly increased with age in either the diabetic or nondiabetic men. Risk ratio analysis showed that diabetic patients had a higher risk than nondiabetic men in all age groups. However, divergent associations with regard to age were noted: those in the youngest age of 40–64 years had the highest risk ratio, followed by those in the oldest of ≥75 years, and those aged 65–74 years had the lowest risk ratio.

Table 1

Rates (per 100,000) and risk ratios of 3-year cumulative incidence of prostate cancer from 2003 to 2005 in diabetic and nondiabetic men by age

Three-year cumulative incidence by age (years)
All ages40–6465–74≥75
Diabetes of any duration 
 Diabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 362 75 120 166 
  n of diabetic men 52,133 26,476 9,959 8,715 
  Rate in diabetic men 694.38 283.28 1,204.94 1,904.76 
 Nondiabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 527 174 159 181 
  n of nondiabetic men 442,509 128,587 17,841 13,168 
  Rate in nondiabetic men 119.09 135.32 891.21 1,374.54 
 Risk ratio 5.83 (5.10–6.66) 2.09 (1.60–2.74) 1.35 (1.07–1.71) 1.39 (1.12–1.71) 
Excluding diabetes diagnosed <1 year 
 Diabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 342 67 112 162 
  n of diabetic men 47,789 24,000 9,342 8,242 
  Rate in diabetic men 715.65 279.17 1,198.89 1,965.54 
 Nondiabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 527 174 159 181 
  n of nondiabetic men 442,509 128,587 17,841 13,168 
  Rate in nondiabetic men 119.09 135.32 891.21 1,374.54 
 Risk ratio 6.01 (5.25–6.88) 2.06 (1.56–2.73) 1.35 (1.06–1.71) 1.43 (1.16–1.76) 
Excluding diabetes diagnosed <3 years 
 Diabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 292 52 96 144 
  n of diabetic men 39,014 19,064 8,005 7,238 
  Rate in diabetic men 748.45 272.77 1,199.25 1,989.50 
 Nondiabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 527 174 159 181 
  n of nondiabetic men 442,509 128,587 17,841 13,168 
  Rate in nondiabetic men 119.09 135.32 891.21 1,374.54 
 Risk ratio 6.28 (5.45–7.25) 2.02 (1.48–2.75) 1.35 (1.05–1.73) 1.45 (1.17–1.80) 
Excluding diabetes diagnosed <5 years 
 Diabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 233 40 75 118 
  n of diabetic men 29,868 14,100 6,493 6,052 
  Rate in diabetic men 780.10 283.69 1,155.09 1,949.77 
 Nondiabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 527 174 159 181 
  n of nondiabetic men 442,509 128,587 17,841 13,168 
  Rate in nondiabetic men 119.09 135.32 891.21 1,374.54 
 Risk ratio 6.55 (5.62–7.64) 2.10 (1.49–2.95) 1.30 (0.99–1.70) 1.42 (1.13–1.79) 
Three-year cumulative incidence by age (years)
All ages40–6465–74≥75
Diabetes of any duration 
 Diabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 362 75 120 166 
  n of diabetic men 52,133 26,476 9,959 8,715 
  Rate in diabetic men 694.38 283.28 1,204.94 1,904.76 
 Nondiabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 527 174 159 181 
  n of nondiabetic men 442,509 128,587 17,841 13,168 
  Rate in nondiabetic men 119.09 135.32 891.21 1,374.54 
 Risk ratio 5.83 (5.10–6.66) 2.09 (1.60–2.74) 1.35 (1.07–1.71) 1.39 (1.12–1.71) 
Excluding diabetes diagnosed <1 year 
 Diabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 342 67 112 162 
  n of diabetic men 47,789 24,000 9,342 8,242 
  Rate in diabetic men 715.65 279.17 1,198.89 1,965.54 
 Nondiabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 527 174 159 181 
  n of nondiabetic men 442,509 128,587 17,841 13,168 
  Rate in nondiabetic men 119.09 135.32 891.21 1,374.54 
 Risk ratio 6.01 (5.25–6.88) 2.06 (1.56–2.73) 1.35 (1.06–1.71) 1.43 (1.16–1.76) 
Excluding diabetes diagnosed <3 years 
 Diabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 292 52 96 144 
  n of diabetic men 39,014 19,064 8,005 7,238 
  Rate in diabetic men 748.45 272.77 1,199.25 1,989.50 
 Nondiabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 527 174 159 181 
  n of nondiabetic men 442,509 128,587 17,841 13,168 
  Rate in nondiabetic men 119.09 135.32 891.21 1,374.54 
 Risk ratio 6.28 (5.45–7.25) 2.02 (1.48–2.75) 1.35 (1.05–1.73) 1.45 (1.17–1.80) 
Excluding diabetes diagnosed <5 years 
 Diabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 233 40 75 118 
  n of diabetic men 29,868 14,100 6,493 6,052 
  Rate in diabetic men 780.10 283.69 1,155.09 1,949.77 
 Nondiabetic men 
  n of prostate cancer 527 174 159 181 
  n of nondiabetic men 442,509 128,587 17,841 13,168 
  Rate in nondiabetic men 119.09 135.32 891.21 1,374.54 
 Risk ratio 6.55 (5.62–7.64) 2.10 (1.49–2.95) 1.30 (0.99–1.70) 1.42 (1.13–1.79) 

Diabetic patients did show a higher frequency in the use of PSA test in either the analysis for all ages or for age ≥40 years (Table 2).

Table 2

Examination of PSA in 2003–2005 by status of diabetes for all ages and age ≥40 years in Taiwanese men

Examination of PSADiabetes
P value
No
Yes
n%n%
All ages      
 No 441,829 99.85 51,662 99.10 <0.0001 
 Yes 680 0.15 471 0.90  
Age ≥40 years      
 No 158,928 99.58 44,681 98.96 <0.0001 
 Yes 668 0.42 469 1.04  
Examination of PSADiabetes
P value
No
Yes
n%n%
All ages      
 No 441,829 99.85 51,662 99.10 <0.0001 
 Yes 680 0.15 471 0.90  
Age ≥40 years      
 No 158,928 99.58 44,681 98.96 <0.0001 
 Yes 668 0.42 469 1.04  

Table 3 shows the results of the logistic regressions. The results were similar in models without (model I) or with (model II) PSA as an additional independent variable. In model II only the ORs for the different subgroups of diabetes duration and PSA test are shown. Age was a remarkable risk factor, and diabetes duration showed a nonlinear increase in the risk. Nephropathy, ischemic heart disease, dyslipidemia, living region, and occupation were significant, whereas chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was borderline significant. None of the medications was significant.

Table 3

Mutually adjusted ORs for prostate cancer derived from cumulative incident cases from 2003 to 2005

VariablesAll ages
Age ≥40 years
OR (95% CI)P valueOR (95% CI)P value
Model I     
 Age, years     
  <40 Referent    
  40–64 30.25 (17.62–51.91) <0.0001 Referent  
  65–74 164.57 (95.10–284.81) <0.0001 5.44 (4.50–6.58) <0.0001 
  ≥75 239.01 (137.40–415.76) <0.0001 7.89 (6.45–9.67) <0.0001 
 Diabetes duration, years vs. nondiabetics     
  <1 1.25 (0.79–1.96) 0.3386 1.25 (0.80–1.96) 0.3352 
  1–3 1.45 (1.08–1.95) 0.0130 1.43 (1.06–1.92) 0.0198 
  3–5 1.40 (1.05–1.86) 0.0224 1.40 (1.05–1.87) 0.0218 
  ≥5 1.30 (1.06–1.60) 0.0129 1.30 (1.06–1.60) 0.0130 
 Hypertension, yes vs. no 1.12 (0.94–1.33) 0.2037 1.12 (0.94–1.34) 0.1922 
 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, yes vs. no 1.15 (0.99–1.33) 0.0657 1.16 (1.00–1.34) 0.0535 
 Stroke, yes vs. no 0.98 (0.81–1.17) 0.8004 0.98 (0.82–1.17) 0.8057 
 Nephropathy, yes vs. no 1.27 (1.04–1.53) 0.0172 1.27 (1.05–1.54) 0.0161 
 Ischemic heart disease, yes vs. no 1.29 (1.09–1.52) 0.0026 1.28 (1.08–1.51) 0.0035 
 Peripheral arterial disease, yes vs. no 0.95 (0.74–1.21) 0.6606 0.95 (0.74–1.21) 0.6595 
 Eye disease, yes vs. no 1.21 (0.84–1.75) 0.3161 1.21 (0.84–1.75) 0.3123 
 Obesity, yes vs. no 0.80 (0.26–2.51) 0.7037 0.81 (0.26–2.55) 0.7228 
 Dyslipidemia, yes vs. no 1.42 (1.19–1.70) 0.0001 1.41 (1.18–1.69) 0.0002 
 Statin, yes vs. no 1.14 (0.90–1.46) 0.2760 1.15 (0.90–1.47) 0.2567 
 Fibrate, yes vs. no 0.93 (0.73–1.19) 0.5782 0.94 (0.74–1.19) 0.5897 
 Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin  receptor blocker, yes vs. no 1.07 (0.86–1.34) 0.5422 1.07 (0.86–1.34) 0.5427 
 Calcium channel blocker, yes vs. no 0.91 (0.72–1.15) 0.4299 0.91 (0.72–1.15) 0.4274 
 Sulfonylurea, yes vs. no 1.07 (0.78–1.46) 0.6873 1.07 (0.78–1.46) 0.6903 
 Metformin, yes vs. no 0.79 (0.56–1.11) 0.1796 0.79 (0.56–1.11) 0.1781 
 Insulin, yes vs. no 0.52 (0.21–1.27) 0.1501 0.51 (0.21–1.27) 0.1481 
 Acarbose, yes vs. no 1.00 (0.49–2.02) 0.9901 1.00 (0.49–2.02) 0.9905 
 Pioglitazone, yes vs. no 0.77 (0.10–5.75) 0.7955 0.77 (0.10–5.77) 0.7979 
 Rosiglitazone, yes vs. no 0.88 (0.43–1.80) 0.7180 0.88 (0.43–1.80) 0.7206 
 Living region     
  Northern vs. Taipei 0.83 (0.68–1.01) 0.0604 0.84 (0.69–1.02) 0.0756 
  Central vs. Taipei 0.66 (0.54–0.81) <0.0001 0.68 (0.56–0.83) 0.0002 
  Southern vs. Taipei 0.44 (0.35–0.57) <0.0001 0.46 (0.36–0.58) <0.0001 
  Kao-Ping and Eastern vs. Taipei 0.48 (0.39–0.60) <0.0001 0.49 (0.40–0.61) <0.0001 
 Occupation     
  II vs. I 0.67 (0.52–0.86) 0.0015 0.68 (0.53–0.88) 0.0028 
  III vs. I 0.78 (0.64–0.95) 0.0126 0.77 (0.63–0.94) 0.0116 
  IV vs. I 0.83 (0.70–0.99) 0.0370 0.84 (0.71–0.99) 0.0475 
Model II*     
 Diabetes duration, years vs. nondiabetics     
  <1 1.207 (0.766–1.904) 0.4175 1.209 (0.767–1.907) 0.4139 
  1–3 1.410 (1.046–1.900) 0.0242 1.381 (1.022–1.866) 0.0357 
  3–5 1.387 (1.036–1.857) 0.0278 1.389 (1.038–1.859) 0.0270 
  ≥5 1.266 (1.028–1.559) 0.0267 1.266 (1.027–1.559) 0.0269 
 PSA test, yes vs. no 13.490 (10.899–16.697) <0.0001 13.374 (10.799–16.563) <0.0001 
VariablesAll ages
Age ≥40 years
OR (95% CI)P valueOR (95% CI)P value
Model I     
 Age, years     
  <40 Referent    
  40–64 30.25 (17.62–51.91) <0.0001 Referent  
  65–74 164.57 (95.10–284.81) <0.0001 5.44 (4.50–6.58) <0.0001 
  ≥75 239.01 (137.40–415.76) <0.0001 7.89 (6.45–9.67) <0.0001 
 Diabetes duration, years vs. nondiabetics     
  <1 1.25 (0.79–1.96) 0.3386 1.25 (0.80–1.96) 0.3352 
  1–3 1.45 (1.08–1.95) 0.0130 1.43 (1.06–1.92) 0.0198 
  3–5 1.40 (1.05–1.86) 0.0224 1.40 (1.05–1.87) 0.0218 
  ≥5 1.30 (1.06–1.60) 0.0129 1.30 (1.06–1.60) 0.0130 
 Hypertension, yes vs. no 1.12 (0.94–1.33) 0.2037 1.12 (0.94–1.34) 0.1922 
 Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, yes vs. no 1.15 (0.99–1.33) 0.0657 1.16 (1.00–1.34) 0.0535 
 Stroke, yes vs. no 0.98 (0.81–1.17) 0.8004 0.98 (0.82–1.17) 0.8057 
 Nephropathy, yes vs. no 1.27 (1.04–1.53) 0.0172 1.27 (1.05–1.54) 0.0161 
 Ischemic heart disease, yes vs. no 1.29 (1.09–1.52) 0.0026 1.28 (1.08–1.51) 0.0035 
 Peripheral arterial disease, yes vs. no 0.95 (0.74–1.21) 0.6606 0.95 (0.74–1.21) 0.6595 
 Eye disease, yes vs. no 1.21 (0.84–1.75) 0.3161 1.21 (0.84–1.75) 0.3123 
 Obesity, yes vs. no 0.80 (0.26–2.51) 0.7037 0.81 (0.26–2.55) 0.7228 
 Dyslipidemia, yes vs. no 1.42 (1.19–1.70) 0.0001 1.41 (1.18–1.69) 0.0002 
 Statin, yes vs. no 1.14 (0.90–1.46) 0.2760 1.15 (0.90–1.47) 0.2567 
 Fibrate, yes vs. no 0.93 (0.73–1.19) 0.5782 0.94 (0.74–1.19) 0.5897 
 Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin  receptor blocker, yes vs. no 1.07 (0.86–1.34) 0.5422 1.07 (0.86–1.34) 0.5427 
 Calcium channel blocker, yes vs. no 0.91 (0.72–1.15) 0.4299 0.91 (0.72–1.15) 0.4274 
 Sulfonylurea, yes vs. no 1.07 (0.78–1.46) 0.6873 1.07 (0.78–1.46) 0.6903 
 Metformin, yes vs. no 0.79 (0.56–1.11) 0.1796 0.79 (0.56–1.11) 0.1781 
 Insulin, yes vs. no 0.52 (0.21–1.27) 0.1501 0.51 (0.21–1.27) 0.1481 
 Acarbose, yes vs. no 1.00 (0.49–2.02) 0.9901 1.00 (0.49–2.02) 0.9905 
 Pioglitazone, yes vs. no 0.77 (0.10–5.75) 0.7955 0.77 (0.10–5.77) 0.7979 
 Rosiglitazone, yes vs. no 0.88 (0.43–1.80) 0.7180 0.88 (0.43–1.80) 0.7206 
 Living region     
  Northern vs. Taipei 0.83 (0.68–1.01) 0.0604 0.84 (0.69–1.02) 0.0756 
  Central vs. Taipei 0.66 (0.54–0.81) <0.0001 0.68 (0.56–0.83) 0.0002 
  Southern vs. Taipei 0.44 (0.35–0.57) <0.0001 0.46 (0.36–0.58) <0.0001 
  Kao-Ping and Eastern vs. Taipei 0.48 (0.39–0.60) <0.0001 0.49 (0.40–0.61) <0.0001 
 Occupation     
  II vs. I 0.67 (0.52–0.86) 0.0015 0.68 (0.53–0.88) 0.0028 
  III vs. I 0.78 (0.64–0.95) 0.0126 0.77 (0.63–0.94) 0.0116 
  IV vs. I 0.83 (0.70–0.99) 0.0370 0.84 (0.71–0.99) 0.0475 
Model II*     
 Diabetes duration, years vs. nondiabetics     
  <1 1.207 (0.766–1.904) 0.4175 1.209 (0.767–1.907) 0.4139 
  1–3 1.410 (1.046–1.900) 0.0242 1.381 (1.022–1.866) 0.0357 
  3–5 1.387 (1.036–1.857) 0.0278 1.389 (1.038–1.859) 0.0270 
  ≥5 1.266 (1.028–1.559) 0.0267 1.266 (1.027–1.559) 0.0269 
 PSA test, yes vs. no 13.490 (10.899–16.697) <0.0001 13.374 (10.799–16.563) <0.0001 

Refer to 2research design and methods for the categories of occupation.

*Model II: additionally adjusted for PSA test; only the ORs for diabetes duration and PSA test are shown.

The trends of prostate cancer were increasing significantly in 1995–2006 (Fig. 2), and diabetes was associated with an increased risk at any duration (Tables 1 and 3), with the highest risk ratio observed in the youngest age of 40–64 years (Table 1).

Although some recent studies still favored a protective effect of diabetes in Caucasians (6,7), a recent population-based case-control study in the US concluded that diabetes was not associated with prostate cancer (OR = 0.98, 95% CI: 0.76–1.27) and that the protective effect of diabetes might be because of a confounding of a mixture with type 1 diabetes (20). In the current study, patients with type 1 diabetes were excluded and its confounding is minimal.

Diabetes was unlikely caused by prostate cancer, because the association was consistent in different analyses (Table 1). Diabetes diagnosed 5 years before prostate cancer can hardly be a consequence of the carcinogenic process. Another possibility for an increased incidence in the diabetic patients is because of screening bias (Table 2). However, our analysis did not support such a possibility because the conclusions remained the same when PSA test was also included in the logistic analyses (model II of Table 3).

Heterogeneity may exist in the association between diabetes and prostate cancer. Some suggested that recent-onset diabetes may increase, but long-standing diabetes might reduce the risk (21). In the current study, although prostate cancer risk increased with increasing diabetes duration in unadjusted models (data not shown), the adjusted models showed that the highest risk was observed at diabetes duration of 1–3 years and then declined gradually (Table 3). Recently serum creatinine is shown to be significantly predictive for prostate cancer risk (22). Our finding of a significantly higher risk of 27% in patients with nephropathy (Table 3) confirmed such an observation. Some suggested that patients with more severe diabetes might have lower level of PSA and lower risk of prostate cancer (23). However, the current study showing a higher risk of prostate cancer associated with nephropathy, ischemic heart disease, and dyslipidemia (Table 3) argued against a simple scenario. With increasing duration and severity of diabetes, chronic complications may set in and interfere with the association between diabetes and prostate cancer. Some suggested that diabetes might only convey a higher risk of more advanced prostate cancer (11,24). However, we did not have sufficient information for analysis.

It is interesting to observe an effect modification by age with the highest risk ratio observed at the youngest age of 40–64 years (Table 1). One explanation is that a higher mortality from other causes in the older diabetic patients before the development of prostate cancer may obscure the relationship, as opposed to the youngest age group who might have been exposed to inflammatory and carcinogenic effects of diabetes for a longer period of time. Such a relationship simply might not have been captured by case-control designs.

Some commonly used medications did not affect the risk (Table 3). However, geographical distribution and socioeconomic status, as indicated by living region and occupation, respectively, did significantly impact the risk (Table 3). People living in metropolitan Taipei region had the highest risk, and the risk seemed to decline gradually with lesser urbanization as shown from the ORs, much deviating from unity from Northern to Central, Southern, and Kao-Ping and Eastern region (Table 3). People with a higher socioeconomic status as indicated by occupation I also suffered from a higher risk (Table 3). The reasons for such discrepancy with regard to geographical distribution and socioeconomic status await further exploration.

This study has several strengths. It is population based with a large nationally representative sample. The database included outpatients and inpatients, and we caught the diagnoses from both sources. Cancer is considered as a severe morbidity by the NHI, and most medical copayments can be waived. Therefore the detection rate would not tend to differ among different social classes. The use of medical record also reduced the potential bias related to self-reporting.

Limitations included a lack of actual measurement of confounders such as obesity, smoking, alcohol drinking, family history, lifestyle, diet, hormones, and genetic parameters. In addition, we did not have biochemical data for evaluating their impact. Finally, the follow-up interval is probably too short to plausibly account for the likely induction time needed between the onset of diabetes and the biological changes leading to prostate cancer.

In summary, this study shows an increasing trend of prostate cancer in Taiwan and a link between diabetes and prostate cancer, which is more remarkable in the age of 40–64 years. Therefore, the observation that diabetes confers a lower risk of prostate cancer might not be universal. Insulin or other oral antidiabetic agents are not, but nephropathy, ischemic heart disease, and dyslipidemia are significantly associated with prostate cancer. The association between prostate cancer and these comorbidities suggests a more complicated scenario in the link between prostate cancer and diabetes at different disease stages. Given that the population is aging, the incidence of prostate cancer is increasing, and the incidence of type 2 diabetes is also increasing (25). The impact of prostate cancer on the population should warrant public health attention.

This study was supported by the National Genotyping Center of National Research Program for Genomic Medicine, National Science Council; the Department of Health (grants DOH89-TD-1035, DOH97-TD-D-113-97009); and the National Science Council (grants NSC-86-2314-B-002-326, NSC-87-2314-B-002-245, NSC-88-2621-B-002-030, NSC-89-2320-B002-125, NSC-90-2320-B-002-197, NSC-92-2320-B-002-156, NSC-93-2320-B-002-071, NSC-94-2314-B-002-142, NSC-95-2314-B-002-311, NSC-96-2314-B-002-061-MY2).

No potential conflicts of interest relevant to this article were reported.

C.-H.T. researched data and wrote the article.

The author thanks the National Genotyping Center of National Research Program for Genomic Medicine, National Science Council; the Department of Health; and the National Science Council for their support on epidemiologic studies of diabetes and arsenic-related health hazards.

1.
Bonovas
S
,
Filioussi
K
,
Tsantes
A
.
Diabetes mellitus and risk of prostate cancer: a meta-analysis
.
Diabetologia
2004
;
47
:
1071
1078
[PubMed]
2.
Kasper
JS
,
Giovannucci
E
.
A meta-analysis of diabetes mellitus and the risk of prostate cancer
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2006
;
15
:
2056
2062
[PubMed]
3.
Ragozzino
M
,
Melton
LJ
 3rd
,
Chu
CP
,
Palumbo
PJ
.
Subsequent cancer risk in the incidence cohort of Rochester, Minnesota, residents with diabetes mellitus
.
J Chronic Dis
1982
;
35
:
13
19
[PubMed]
4.
Wideroff
L
,
Gridley
G
,
Mellemkjaer
L
, et al
.
Cancer incidence in a population-based cohort of patients hospitalized with diabetes mellitus in Denmark
.
J Natl Cancer Inst
1997
;
89
:
1360
1365
[PubMed]
5.
Weiderpass
E
,
Ye
W
,
Vainio
H
,
Kaaks
R
,
Adami
HO
.
Reduced risk of prostate cancer among patients with diabetes mellitus
.
Int J Cancer
2002
;
102
:
258
261
[PubMed]
6.
Waters
KM
,
Henderson
BE
,
Stram
DO
,
Wan
P
,
Kolonel
LN
,
Haiman
CA
.
Association of diabetes with prostate cancer risk in the multiethnic cohort
.
Am J Epidemiol
2009
;
169
:
937
945
[PubMed]
7.
Kasper
JS
,
Liu
Y
,
Giovannucci
E
.
Diabetes mellitus and risk of prostate cancer in the health professionals follow-up study
.
Int J Cancer
2009
;
124
:
1398
1403
[PubMed]
8.
Baradaran
N
,
Ahmadi
H
,
Salem
S
, et al
.
The protective effect of diabetes mellitus against prostate cancer: role of sex hormones
.
Prostate
2009
;
69
:
1744
1750
[PubMed]
9.
Chodick
G
,
Heymann
AD
,
Rosenmann
L
, et al
.
Diabetes and risk of incident cancer: a large population-based cohort study in Israel
.
Cancer Causes Control
2010
;
21
:
879
887
[PubMed]
10.
Mishina
T
,
Watanabe
H
,
Araki
H
,
Nakao
M
.
Epidemiological study of prostatic cancer by matched-pair analysis
.
Prostate
1985
;
6
:
423
436
[PubMed]
11.
Li
Q
,
Kuriyama
S
,
Kakizaki
M
, et al
.
History of diabetes mellitus and the risk of prostate cancer: the Ohsaki Cohort Study
.
Cancer Causes Control
2010
;
21
:
1025
1032
[PubMed]
12.
Tseng
CH
,
Chong
CK
,
Tai
TY
.
Secular trend for mortality from breast cancer and the association between diabetes and breast cancer in Taiwan between 1995 and 2006
.
Diabetologia
2009
;
52
:
240
246
[PubMed]
13.
Tseng
CH
,
Chong
CK
,
Tseng
CP
,
Chan
TT
.
Age-related risk of mortality from bladder cancer in diabetic patients: a 12-year follow-up of a national cohort in Taiwan
.
Ann Med
2009
;
41
:
371
379
[PubMed]
14.
Vigneri
P
,
Frasca
F
,
Sciacca
L
,
Pandini
G
,
Vigneri
R
.
Diabetes and cancer
.
Endocr Relat Cancer
2009
;
16
:
1103
1123
[PubMed]
15.
Giovannucci
E
,
Harlan
DM
,
Archer
MC
, et al
.
Diabetes and cancer: a consensus report
.
Diabetes Care
2010
;
33
:
1674
1685
[PubMed]
16.
Department of Health, Taiwan. Statistics of national health insurance in 2005: table 6. Beneficiaries by gender and sex [article online]. Available from http://www.doh.gov.tw/CHT2006/DM/DM2_2.aspx?now_fod_list_no=10383&class_no=440&level_no=4. Accessed 8 August 2009
17.
Taiwan Cancer Registry. Secular trends of incidence of prostate cancer in Taiwan from 1979 to 2007 [article online]. Available from http://tcr.cph.ntu.edu.tw/uploadimages/Year_Male%20genital.xls. Accessed 20 July 2010
18.
Kleinbaum
DG
,
Kupper
LL
,
Morgenstern
H
.
Epidemiologic Research: Principles and Quantitative Methods
.
New York, John Wiley and Sons
,
1982
, p.
298
299
19.
Wu
TT
.
Should a prostate biopsy be advised for men with serum prostate-specific antigen levels of 2.5-4.0 ng/ml?
JTUA
2007
;
18
:
135
138
20.
Pierce
BL
,
Plymate
S
,
Ostrander
EA
,
Stanford
JL
.
Diabetes mellitus and prostate cancer risk
.
Prostate
2008
;
68
:
1126
1132
[PubMed]
21.
Darbinian
JA
,
Ferrara
AM
,
Van Den Eeden
SK
,
Quesenberry
CP
 Jr
,
Fireman
B
,
Habel
LA
.
Glycemic status and risk of prostate cancer
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2008
;
17
:
628
635
[PubMed]
22.
Weinstein
SJ
,
Mackrain
K
,
Stolzenberg-Solomon
RZ
,
Selhub
J
,
Virtamo
J
,
Albanes
D
.
Serum creatinine and prostate cancer risk in a prospective study
.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2009
;
18
:
2643
2649
[PubMed]
23.
Müller
H
,
Raum
E
,
Rothenbacher
D
,
Stegmaier
C
,
Brenner
H
.
Association of diabetes and body mass index with levels of prostate-specific antigen: implications for correction of prostate-specific antigen cutoff values?
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev
2009
;
18
:
1350
1356
[PubMed]
24.
Leitzmann
MF
,
Ahn
J
,
Albanes
D
, et al
Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Trial Project Team
.
Diabetes mellitus and prostate cancer risk in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial
.
Cancer Causes Control
2008
;
19
:
1267
1276
[PubMed]
25.
Tseng
CH
,
Tseng
CP
,
Chong
CK
, et al
.
Increasing incidence of diagnosed type 2 diabetes in Taiwan: analysis of data from a national cohort
.
Diabetologia
2006
;
49
:
1755
1760
[PubMed]