ArticleJournal of hematology & oncology2026
Agent-specific, histopathology-stratified hematologic malignancy risk among dpp-4 inhibitors, glp-1 receptor agonists, and SGLT2 inhibitors: a network meta-analysis of 270,471 participants.
Article in Journal of hematology & oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, and sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are widely prescribed for their cardiometabolic benefits, yet their hematologic oncologic safety remains uncertain. Because hematologic malignancies are highly lethal and biologically heterogeneous, delineating drug-specific risks across histopathologic subtypes is clinically crucial. This histopathology-stratified network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluated and compared the hematologic malignancy risks associated with individual agents from these drug classes. Following Cochrane guidance for adverse-event synthesis, we conducted this frequentist-based NMA of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary endpoint was incident hematologic malignancy, categorized a priori into leukemia (acute and chronic forms), lymphoma (Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin), and myeloma/plasma cell neoplasms. Bayesian models were used as sensitivity analyses. Seventy-five RCTs including 270,471 participants were eligible. Dulaglutide was associated with a significantly increased risk of overall hematologic malignancy (RR = 2.17, 95% CIs = 1.14–4.17). In contrast, tirzepatide (RR = 0.22, 95% CIs = 0.06–0.78) and linagliptin (RR = 0.51, 95% CIs = 0.27–0.95) were linked to a reduced overall risk. In histopathology-specific analyses, tirzepatide showed a significant protective association against non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, whereas no agent demonstrated clear signals for leukemia or myeloma. In this histopathology-focused NMA, dulaglutide emerged as the only agent with a significantly elevated overall hematologic malignancy risk, whereas tirzepatide and linagliptin exhibited protective profiles. The lymphoma-specific benefit observed for tirzepatide underscores the value of histologic subclassification when evaluating oncologic safety of antidiabetic therapies and calls for targeted mechanistic and long-term outcome studies.
trial registrationPROSPERO CRD420251151419. The study protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Tri-Service General Hospital, National Defense Medical University (TSGHIRB E202516007).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.