Background: Peptic ulcer and its treatments have been associated to pancreatic cancer risk, although the evidence is inconsistent. Methods: We pooled 10 case-control studies within the Pancreatic Cancer Case-control Consortium (PanC4), including 4717 pancreatic cancer cases and 9374 controls, and estimated summary odds ratios (OR) using multivariable logistic regression models. Results: The OR for pancreatic cancer was 1.10 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-1.23] for history of ulcer (OR = 1.08 for gastric and 0.97 for duodenal ulcer). The association was stronger for a diagnosis within 2 years before cancer diagnosis (OR = 2.43 for peptic, 1.75 for gastric, and 1.98 for duodenal ulcer). The OR was 1.53 (95% CI 1.15-2.03) for history of gastrectomy; however, the excess risk was limited to a gastrectomy within 2 years before cancer diagnosis (OR = 6.18, 95% CI 1.82-20.96), while no significant increased risk was observed for longer time since gastrectomy. No associations were observed for pharmacological treatments for ulcer, such as antacids, H2-receptor antagonists, or proton-pump inhibitors. Conclusions: This uniquely large collaborative study does not support the hypothesis that peptic ulcer and its treatment materially affect pancreatic cancer risk. The increased risk for short-term history of ulcer and gastrectomy suggests that any such association is due to increased cancer surveillance.

Ulcer, gastric surgery and pancreatic cancer risk : an analysis from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4) / C. Bosetti, E. Lucenteforte, P.M. Bracci, E. Negri, R.E. Neale, H.A. Risch, S.H. Olson, S. Gallinger, A.B. Miller, H.B. Bueno-de-Mesquita, R. Talamini, J. Polesel, P. Ghadirian, P.A. Baghurst, W. Zatonski, E. Fontham, E.A. Holly, Y.T. Gao, H. Yu, R.C. Kurtz, M. Cotterchio, P. Maisonneuve, M.P. Zeegers, E.J. Duell, P. Boffetta, C. La Vecchia. - In: ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY. - ISSN 0923-7534. - 24:11(2013 Nov), pp. mdt336.2903-mdt336.2910. [10.1093/annonc/mdt336]

Ulcer, gastric surgery and pancreatic cancer risk : an analysis from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4)

E. Lucenteforte
Secondo
;
E. Negri;C. La Vecchia
Ultimo
2013

Abstract

Background: Peptic ulcer and its treatments have been associated to pancreatic cancer risk, although the evidence is inconsistent. Methods: We pooled 10 case-control studies within the Pancreatic Cancer Case-control Consortium (PanC4), including 4717 pancreatic cancer cases and 9374 controls, and estimated summary odds ratios (OR) using multivariable logistic regression models. Results: The OR for pancreatic cancer was 1.10 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-1.23] for history of ulcer (OR = 1.08 for gastric and 0.97 for duodenal ulcer). The association was stronger for a diagnosis within 2 years before cancer diagnosis (OR = 2.43 for peptic, 1.75 for gastric, and 1.98 for duodenal ulcer). The OR was 1.53 (95% CI 1.15-2.03) for history of gastrectomy; however, the excess risk was limited to a gastrectomy within 2 years before cancer diagnosis (OR = 6.18, 95% CI 1.82-20.96), while no significant increased risk was observed for longer time since gastrectomy. No associations were observed for pharmacological treatments for ulcer, such as antacids, H2-receptor antagonists, or proton-pump inhibitors. Conclusions: This uniquely large collaborative study does not support the hypothesis that peptic ulcer and its treatment materially affect pancreatic cancer risk. The increased risk for short-term history of ulcer and gastrectomy suggests that any such association is due to increased cancer surveillance.
anti-ulcer drugs ; case–control study ; gastrectomy ; pancreatic cancer ; peptic ulcer ; pooled analysis
Settore MED/01 - Statistica Medica
nov-2013
Article (author)
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2434/231797
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 8
  • Scopus 26
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 20
social impact