Incidence and Risk of Treatment-Related Mortality with mTOR Inhibitors Everolimus and Temsirolimus in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Two novel mammalian targets of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors everolimus and temsirolimus are now approved by regulatory agencies and have been widely investigated among various types of solid tumors, but the risk of fatal adverse events (FAEs) with these drugs is not well defined.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases for relevant trials. Eligible studies included prospective phase II and III trials evaluating everolimus and temsirolimus in patients with all malignancies and data on FAEs were available. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, RRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using either random effects or fixed effect models according to the heterogeneity of the included studies.

Results

A total of 3322 patients with various advanced solid tumors from 12 trials were included. The overall incidence of mTOR inhibitors associated FAEs was 1.8% (95%CI: 1.3–2.5%), and the incidences of everolimus related FAEs were comparable to that of temsirolimus (1.7% versus 1.8%). Compared with the controls, the use of mTOR inhibitors was associated with an increased risk of FAEs, with a RR of 3.24 (95%CI: 1.21–8.67, p = 0.019). On subgroup analysis, a non-statistically significant increase in the risk of FAEs was found according to different mTOR inhibitors, tumor types or controlled therapy. No evidence of publication bias was observed.

Conclusion

With the present evidence, the use of mTOR inhibitors seems to increase the risk of FAEs in patients with advanced solid tumors. More high quality trials are still needed to investigate this association.     

Insulin Glargine and Cancer Risk in Patients with Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis

Aim

The role of insulin glargine as a risk factor for cancer is controversial in human studies. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the relationship between insulin glargine and cancer incidence.

Methods

All observational studies and randomized controlled trials evaluating the relationship of insulin glargine and cancer risk were identified in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and the Chinese Biomedical Medical Literature Database, through March 2012. Odds ratios (ORs) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated with a random-effects model. Confidence in the estimates of the obtained effects (quality of evidence) was assessed by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach.

Results

A total of 11 studies including 448,928 study subjects and 19,128 cancer patients were finally identified for the meta-analysis. Insulin glargine use was associated with a lower odds of cancer compared with non-glargine insulin use (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.98, P = 0.03; very low-quality evidence). Glargine did not increase the odds of breast cancer (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.46, P = 0.966; very low-quality evidence). Compared with non-glargine insulin, no significant association was found between insulin glargine and prostate cancer, pancreatic cancer and respiratory tract cancer. Insulin glargine use was associated with lower odds of other site-specific cancer.

Conclusions

Results from the meta-analysis don''t support the link between insulin glargine and an increased risk of cancer and the confidence in the estimates of the effects is very low. Further studies are needed to examine the relation between insulin glargine and cancer risk, especially breast cancer.     

Risk of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients with Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

People with cancer are known to be at increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), and this risk is believed to vary according to cancer type, stage of disease, and treatment modality. Our purpose was to summarise the existing literature to determine precisely and accurately the absolute risk of VTE in cancer patients, stratified by malignancy site and background risk of VTE.

Methods and Findings

We searched the Medline and Embase databases from 1 January 1966 to 14 July 2011 to identify cohort studies comprising people diagnosed with one of eight specified cancer types or where participants were judged to be representative of all people with cancer. For each included study, the number of patients who developed clinically apparent VTE, and the total person-years of follow-up were extracted. Incidence rates of VTE were pooled across studies using the generic inverse variance method. In total, data from 38 individual studies were included. Among average-risk patients, the overall risk of VTE was estimated to be 13 per 1,000 person-years (95% CI, 7 to 23), with the highest risk among patients with cancers of the pancreas, brain, and lung. Among patients judged to be at high risk (due to metastatic disease or receipt of high-risk treatments), the risk of VTE was 68 per 1,000 person-years (95% CI, 48 to 96), with the highest risk among patients with brain cancer (200 per 1,000 person-years; 95% CI, 162 to 247). Our results need to be considered in light of high levels of heterogeneity, which exist due to differences in study population, outcome definition, and average duration of follow-up between studies.

Conclusions

VTE occurs in greater than 1% of cancer patients each year, but this varies widely by cancer type and time since diagnosis. The absolute VTE risks obtained from this review can aid in clinical decision-making about which people with cancer should receive anticoagulant prophylaxis and at what times. Please see later in the article for the Editors'' Summary.     

Increased Risk of Cerebrovascular Events in Patients with Cancer Treated with Bevacizumab: A Meta-Analysis

Arterial ischemia and hemorrhage are associated with bevacizumab, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor that is widely used to treat many types of cancers. As specific types of arterial ischemia and hemorrhage, cerebrovascular events such as central nervous system (CNS) ischemic events and CNS hemorrhage are serious adverse events. However, increased cerebrovascular events have not been uniformly reported by previous studies. New randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been reported in recent years and we therefore conducted an up-to-date meta-analysis of RCTs to fully characterize the risk of cerebrovascular events with bevacizumab. We searched the databases of PubMed, Web of Science, and the American Society of Clinical Oncology conferences to identify relevant clinical trials up to February 2014. Eligible studies included prospective RCTs that directly compared patients with cancer treated with and without bevacizumab. A total of 12,917 patients from 17 RCTs were included in our analysis. Patients treated with bevacizumab had a significantly increased risk of cerebrovascular events compared with patients treated with control medication, with a relative risk of 3.28 (95% CI, 1.97–5.48). The risks of CNS ischemic events and CNS hemorrhage were increased compared with control, with RRs of 3.22 (95% CI, 1.71–6.07) and 3.09 (95% CI, 1.36–6.99), respectively. Risk varied with the bevacizumab dose, with RRs of 3.97 (95% CI, 2.15–7.36) and 1.96 (95% CI, 0.76–5.06) at 5 and 2.5 mg/kg/week, respectively. Higher risks were observed in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (RR, 6.42; 95% CI, 1.76–35.57), and no significant risk was observed in other types of tumors. In conclusion, the addition of bevacizumab significantly increased the risk of cerebrovascular events compared with controls, including CNS ischemic events and CNS hemorrhage. The risk may vary with bevacizumab dose and tumor type.     

Significantly Increased Risk of Cancer in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

ObjectiveTo conduct a review and meta-analysis of the effect of diabetes mellitus on the incidence of and mortality attributable to cancer at any anatomic site.MethodsWe performed a search of MEDLINE and the Cochrane Library for pertinent articles published from the origin of these databases to July 5, 2010, and included them in a qualitative review and meta-analysis of the risk of all-cancer incidence and mortality in patients with diabetes.ResultsAmong patients with diabetes (n = 257,222) in 12 cohort studies, the cancer incidence was about 7%. The cancer mortality was approximately 3% among patients with diabetes (n = 152,091) in 19 cohort studies. The pooled adjusted risk ratio (RR) of all-cancer incidence was significantly elevated—RR, 1.10 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.17) overall; RR, 1.14 (CI, 1.06 to 23) for men; and RR, 1.18 (CI, 1.08 to 1.28) for women. Diabetes was also associated with an increased RR of mortality across all cancer types—RR, 1.16 (CI, 1.03 to 1.30) overall; RR, 1.10 (CI, 0.98 to 1.23) for men; and RR, 1.24 (CI, 1.11 to 1.40) for women.ConclusionCancer prevention and early detection by appropriate screening methods in patients with diabetes should be important components of clinical management and investigation, inasmuch as the exponentially increasing prevalence of diabetes will translate into substantial clinical and public health consequences on a global scale. (Endocr Pract. 2011;17:616-628)     

Incidence and Risk of Cardiotoxicity Associated with Bortezomib in the Treatment of Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the incidence and risk of cardiotoxicity associated with bortezomib in cancer patients.

Methods

Databases from PubMed, Web of Science and abstracts presented at ASCO meeting up to July 31, 2013 were searched to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies included prospective phase II and III trials evaluating bortezomib in cancer patients with adequate data on cardiotoxicity. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using either random effects or fixed effect models according to the heterogeneity of included studies.

Results

A total of 5718 patients with a variety of malignancies from 25 clinical trials were included in our analysis. The incidence of all-grade and high-grade cardiotoxicity associated with bortezomib was 3.8% (95%CI: 2.6–5.6%) and 2.3% (1.6–3.5%), with a mortality of 3.0% (1.4–6.5%). Patients treated with bortezomib did not significantly increase the risk of all-grade (OR 1.15, 95%CI: 0.82–1.62, p = 0.41) and high-grade (OR 1.13, 95%CI: 0.58–2.24, p = 0.72) cardiotoxicity compared with patients treated with control medication. Sub-group analysis showed that the incidence of cardiotoxicity varied with tumor types, treatment regimens and phases of trials. No evidence of publication bias was observed.

Conclusions

The use of bortezomib does not significantly increase the risk of cardiotoxicity compared to control patients. Further studies are recommended to investigate this association and risk differences among different tumor types, treatment regimens and phases of trials.     

Incidence and Risk of Treatment-Related Mortality with Anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Monoclonal Antibody in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis of 21 Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) cetuximab and panitumumab have emerged as an effective targeted therapy in the treatment of cancer patients, but the overall incidence and risk of fatal adverse events (FAEs) associated with these agents is still unclear.

Methods

Databases from PubMed, Web of Science and abstracts presented at ASCO meeting up to May 31, 2013 were searched to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies included prospective randomized controlled trials evaluating MoAbs in cancer patients with adequate data on FAEs. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using either random effects or fixed effect models according to the heterogeneity of included studies.

Results

A total of 14,776 patients with a variety of solid tumors from 21 clinical trials were included in our analysis. The overall incidence of MoAbs associated FAEs was 1.7% (95%CI: 1.1–2.5%), and the incidence of cetuximab-related FAEs was higher than that of panitumumab (2.0% versus 0.9%). Compared with the controls, the use of MoAbs was associated with a significantly increased risk of FAEs, with an OR of 1.37 (95%CI: 1.04–1.81, p=0.024). Subgroup analysis based on EGFR-MoAbs drugs, phase of trials and tumor types demonstrated a tendency to increase the risk of FAEs, but the risk did not increase in breast cancer, esophagus cancer and phase II trials.

Conclusions

With present evidence, the use of EGFR-MoAbs is associated with an increased risk of FAEs in patients with advanced solid tumors.     

Statins and the Risk of Lung Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Purpose

Several epidemiologic studies have evaluated the association between statins and lung cancer risk, whereas randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on cardiovascular outcomes provide relevant data as a secondary end point. We conducted a meta-analysis of all relevant studies to examine this association.

Methods

A systematic literature search up to March 2012 was performed in PubMed database. Study-specific risk estimates were pooled using a random-effects model.

Results

Nineteen studies (5 RCTs and 14 observational studies) involving 38,013 lung cancer cases contributed to the analysis. They were grouped on the basis of study design, and separate meta-analyses were conducted. There was no evidence of an association between statin use and risk of lung cancer either among RCTs (relative risk [RR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76–1.09), among cohort studies (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82–1.07), or among case-control studies (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57–1.16). Low evidence of publication bias was found. However, statistically significant heterogeneity was found among cohort studies and among case-control studies. After excluding the studies contributing most to the heterogeneity, summary estimates were essentially unchanged.

Conclusion

The results of our meta-analysis suggest that there is no association between statin use and the risk of lung cancer.     

Incidence of Cancer in ANCA-Associated Vasculitis: A Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

ObjectiveThe purpose of this paper is to examine cancer incidence in patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis (AASV) derived from population-based cohort studies by means of meta-analysis.MethodsRelevant electronic databases were searched for studies characterizing the associated risk of overall malignancy in patients with AASV. Standardized incidence rates (SIRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate the strength of association. We tested for publication bias and heterogeneity and stratified for site-specific cancers.ResultsSix studies (n = 2,578) were eventually identified, of which six provided the SIR for overall malignancy, five reported the SIR for non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC), four for leukemia, five for bladder cancer, three for lymphoma, three for liver cancer, four for lung cancer, three for kidney cancer, four for prostate cancer, four for colon cancer and four for breast cancer. Overall, the pooled SIR of cancer in AASV patients was 1.74 (95%CI = 1.37–2.21), with moderate heterogeneity among these studies (I² = 65.8%, P = 0.012). In sub-analyses for site-specific cancers, NMSC, leukemia and bladder cancer were more frequently observed in patients with AASV with SIR of 5.18 (95%CI = 3.47–7.73), 4.89 (95%CI = 2.93–8.16) and 3.84 (95%CI = 2.72–5.42) respectively. There was no significant increase in the risk of kidney cancer (SIR = 2.12, 95%CI = 0.66–6.85), prostate cancer (SIR = 1.45, 95%CI = 0.87–2.42), colon cancer (SIR = 1.26, 95%CI = 0.70–2.27), and breast cancer (SIR = 0.95, 95%CI = 0.50–1.79). Among these site-specific cancers, only NMSC showed moderate heterogeneity (I² = 55.8%, P = 0.06). No publication bias was found by using the Begg’s test and Egger''s test.ConclusionsThis meta-analysis shows that AASV patients treatment with cyclophosphamide (CYC) are at increased risk of late-occurring malignancies, particularly of the NMSC, leukemia and bladder cancer. However, there is no significant association between AASV and kidney cancer, prostate cancer, colon cancer and breast cancer. These findings emphasize monitoring and preventative management in AASV patients after cessation of CYC therapy is momentous.     

Fish Intake and Risk of Liver Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Increasing laboratory findings indicate that n-3 fatty acids, mainly derived from fish, inhibit cancer development and progression, but results from epidemiologic studies have been inconsistent and inconclusive.

Objective

To evaluate the association of fish intake with risk of liver cancer by conducting a meta-analysis.

Methods

Published case-control/cohort studies that evaluated the relationship between total fish intake and risk of liver cancer were found on PubMed and EMBASE. The pooled relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained with the random-effects model.

Results

Five retrospective case-control studies and 5 prospective cohort studies were included in the final analysis, involving a total of 3 624 liver cancer cases. Comparing the highest with the lowest category of total fish intake, the pooled RRs of liver cancer were 0.79 (95% CI, 0.59-1.06) for case-control studies, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.70-0.96) for cohort studies and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.71-0.94) for all studies combined. The protective effects of total fish intake against liver cancer were confirmed by stratified and sensitivity analyses. In addition, an increase in fish intake of 1 serving/week was estimated to be significantly associated with 6% lower risk of liver cancer (RR = 0.94, 95% CI, 0.91-0.98).

Conclusions

Findings from this meta-analysis suggest that a higher fish intake is associated with reduced risk of liver cancer.     

Association of mTOR Polymorphisms with Cancer Risk and Clinical Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis

Genetic polymorphisms in mTOR gene may be associated with cancer risk and clinical outcomes of cancer patients by affecting mTOR gene expression or its activation. However, inconsistent results have been reported. The aim of this study is to systematically evaluate the association between mTOR polymorphisms (rs2295080, rs2536 and rs11121704) and cancer risk as well as clinical outcome by a meta-analysis. We identified 10 eligible studies and extracted data by two investigators. Based on dominant and recessive models, odds ratio (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by using Stata, version 11 to evaluate the association strength. Our meta-analysis results showed that the wild genotype TT of rs2295080 polymorphism was associated with increased cancer risk under dominant model (OR = 1.24, 95%CI: 1.12–1.36, p<0.0005) in Chinese but not with clinical outcome parameters, while the TT genotype of rs11121704 was associated with poor clinical outcome parameters (OR = 1.53, 95%CI: 1.01–2.32, p = 0.044), such as death, metastasis and resistance to chemotherapy. However, rs2536 may not influence cancer susceptibility. In conclusion, this meta-analysis indicated the common polymorphisms in mTOR gene might be genetic risk factors for the carcinogenesis and clinical outcomes of cancer patients. However, further investigation on large population and different ethnicities are warranted.     

Risk of Primary Liver Cancer Associated with Gallstones and Cholecystectomy: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Recent epidemiological evidence points to an association between gallstones or cholecystectomy and the incidence risk of liver cancer, but the results are inconsistent. We present a meta-analysis of observational studies to explore this association.

Methods

We identified studies by a literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and relevant conference proceedings up to March 2014. A random-effects model was used to generate pooled multivariable adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran’s Q statistic and the I².

Results

Fifteen studies (five case-control and 10 cohort studies) were included in this analysis. There were 4,487,662 subjects in total, 17,945 diagnoses of liver cancer, 328,420 exposed to gallstones, and 884,507 exposed to cholecystectomy. Pooled results indicated a significant increased risk of liver cancer in patients with a history of gallstones (OR = 2.54; 95% CI, 1.71–3.79; n = 11 studies), as well as cholecystectomy (OR = 1.62; 95% CI, 1.29–2.02; n = 12 studies), but there was considerable heterogeneity among these studies. The effects estimates did not vary markedly when stratified by gender, study design, study region, and study quality. The multivariate meta-regression analysis suggested that study region and study quality appeared to explain the heterogeneity observed in the cholecystectomy analysis.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that individuals with a history of gallstones and cholecystectomy may have an increased risk of liver cancer.     

Radial Scars and Subsequent Breast Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis

Background

The relationship between radial scars and breast cancer is unclear, as the results of different studies are inconsistent. We aim to solve the controversy and assess the breast cancer risk of radial scars.

Methods

Case-control or cohort studies about radial scars and breast cancer risk published in PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from 2000 to 2013 were searched. Heterogeneity for the eligible data was assessed and a pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated.

Results

Five observational studies involving 2521 cases and 20290 controls were included in our study. From pooled analysis, radial scars were found to have a 1.33 fold increased risk of breast cancer, but which was not significant (P = 0.138). Sample size contributed to heterogeneity. In subgroup analysis, the results pooled from studies with sample size >2000 show that presence of radial scars was associated with 1.6 times breast cancer risk compared to absence of radial scars. Radial scars increased the risk of breast cancer among women with proliferative disease without atypia, but no significant association between radial scars and carcinoma was noted among women with atypical hyperplasia.

Conclusions

Radial scars tend to be associated with an increased breast cancer risk. Radial scars should be considered among women with proliferative disease without atypia, while atypical hyperplasia is still the primary concern among women with both radial scars and atypical hyperplasia.     

Association of XPC Polymorphisms and Lung Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group C gene (XPC) is a key member of nucleotide excision repair pathway and plays an important role in human DNA repair system. It is reported that several common polymorphisms of XPC are associated with susceptibility to lung cancer. However, the conclusion is still elusive.

Method

This meta-analysis was performed to determine the relationship between XPC polymorphisms (Lys939Gln, Ala499Val, and PAT) and lung cancer risk. Published literatures were identified by searching online databases and reference lists of relevant studies. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to estimate the association strength. Publication bias were detected by Egger’s and Begg’s test.

Result

After strict screening, we identified 14 eligible studies in this meta-analysis, including 5647 lung cancer cases and 6908 controls. By pooling all eligible studies, we found that the homozygote Gln939Gln genotype was associated with a significantly increased risk of lung cancer in Asian population (GlnGln vs LysLys, OR = 1.229, 95% CI: 1.000–1.510; GlnGln vs LysLys/LysGln, OR = 1.257, 95% CI: 1.038–1.522). As for the PAT polymorphism, in Caucasian population, we found carriers of the −/− genotype were associated significantly reduced risk of lung cancer in homozygote comparison model (−/− vs +/+, OR = 0.735, 95% CI: 0.567–0.952).

Conclusion

In this meta-analysis we found that Gln939Gln genotype was associated with significantly increased risk of lung cancer in Asian population; the PAT −/− genotype significantly reduced susceptibility to lung cancer in Caucasian population; while the XPC Ala499Val polymorphism was not associated with lung cancer risk.     

Age at Menarche and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Various observational studies have focused on the relationship between menarcheal age and the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, the association is still controversial because of inconsistent results. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to assess this issue from epidemiological studies.

Methods

After a literature search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science for studies of menarcheal age and CRC risk published through the end of January 2013, we pooled the relative risks (RRs) from included studies using a fixed- or random-effects model and performed heterogeneity and publication bias analyses. All statistical tests were two-sided.

Results

Eleven case-control and 11 cohort studies were eligible for inclusion in our analysis. The random-effects pooled RR for oldest versus youngest menarcheal age was 0.95 [95% confidence intervals (CIs) = 0.85–1.06], with significant heterogeneity (Q = 61.03, P<0.001, I ² = 65.6%). When separately analyzed, case-control (RR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.75–1.21) and cohort studies (RR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.90–1.04) yielded similar results. Moreover, similar results were also observed among the subgroup analyses by study quality, population, exposure assessment, anatomic cancer site, subsite of colon cancer, and several potential important confounders and risk factors. There was no evidence of publication bias and significant heterogeneity between subgroups detected by meta-regression analyses.

Conclusions

Findings from this meta-analysis demonstrated that menarcheal age was not associated with the risk of CRC in humans. Further studies are warranted to stratify results by the subsite of colon cancer and menopause status in the future.     

PLCE1 Polymorphism and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis

Background

In recent years, the PLCE1 rs2274223 polymorphism has been extensively investigated as a potential risk factor for upper gastrointestinal cancers, including squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) and gastric cancer. However, the results of these studies have been inconsistent.

Methods

A meta-analysis of 13 case-control studies was performed including more than 11,000 subjects with genotyped PLCE1 rs2274223 polymorphisms. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were employed to assess the association of the PLCE1 rs2274223 polymorphism with a susceptibility to ESCC or gastric cancer.

Results

A statistically significant increase in the risk of ESCC was associated with the PLCE1 rs2274223 polymorphism. This included the homozygous genetic model (OR = 1.46), heterozygous genetic model (OR = 1.25) and allelic genetic model (OR = 1.23). Similar results were consistently found for gastric cancer. In a subgroup analysis, the PLCE1 rs2274223 polymorphism was found to be a very sensitive marker for gastric cardia cancer as shown by the homozygous genetic model (OR = 2.23), heterozygous genetic model(OR = 1.59) and allelic genetic model (OR = 1.47). The risk associations of all of the gastric cardia cancer models were statistically significant. In contrast, none of the genetic models for non-cardia gastric cancer were significant.

Conclusions

In this meta-analysis, the PLCE1 rs2274223 polymorphism was confirmed to have a statistically significant association with an increasing risk of ESCC and gastric cancer. The increase risk was especially observed for gastric cardia cancer.     

Tumor Necrosis Factor-A Polymorphisms and Colorectal Cancer Risk: A Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives

Tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) was related to inflammation and involved in the development of colorectal cancer. Polymorphisms located in TNF-a promoter region, such as 308G/A and 238G/A, could affect the risk of various types of cancer by regulating TNF-a production. In this study, a meta-analysis was performed to investigate the association between common polymorphisms of TNF-a promoter region and colorectal cancer susceptibility.

Methods

Searching of several databases was performed for all publications on the association between TNF-a polymorphisms and colorectal cancer. Summary odds ratios (ORs) with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. Stratified analyses based on ethnicity and control population source were also conducted.

Results

Overall, TNF-a 308A polymorphism showed a significant association with increased risk of colorectal cancer in worldwide populations under homozygote comparison [AA vs. GG, OR (95% CI) = 1.46 (1.07–1.97)] other than heterozygote comparison [AG vs. GG, OR (95% CI) = 1.05 (0.93–1.19)]. TNF-a 238A was not associated with colorectal cancer risk under homozygote or heterozygote comparisons. In stratified analysis, significant association was observed only in Western populations [AA vs. GG, OR (95% CI) = 1.39 (1.01–1.91)] other than in Eastern populations under homozygote comparison. No significant difference was observed between population-based subgroup and hospital-based subgroup.

Conclusions

TNF-a 308A was moderately associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer in Western populations, and TNF-a 238A polymorphism was not significantly associated with colorectal cancer risk.     

Tooth Loss and Risk of Head and Neck Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Observational studies suggest an association between tooth loss and risk of head and neck cancer. However, whether tooth loss is an independent risk factor for head and neck cancer still remains controversial. The aim of this study is to assess the association between tooth loss and head and neck cancer risk.

Methods

Eligible studies were searched in PubMed and Embase databases from their inception to March 2013. A random-effects model or fixed-effects model was used to calculate the overall combined risk estimates.

Results

Eight case-control studies and one cross-sectional study involving 5,204 patients and 5,518 controls were included in the meta-analysis. The overall combined odds ratio for tooth loss and head and neck cancer was 2.00 (95% confidence interval, 1.28–3.14). Similar results yielded both in the moderate and severe tooth loss group. Sensitivity analysis based on various exclusion criteria maintained this significance with respect to head and neck cancer individually. Little evidence of publication bias was observed.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis suggests that tooth loss is associated with increased risk of head and neck cancer. This increase is probably independent of conventional head and neck cancer risk factors.     

Prognostic Value of SPARC in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

There is a heated debate on whether the prognostic value of SPARC is favorable or unfavorable. Thus, we carried out a meta-analysis evaluating the relationship between SPARC expression and the prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Web of Science for relevant articles. The pooled hazard ratios (HRs) and corresponding 95%CI of overall survival (OS) were calculated to evaluate the prognostic value of SPARC expression in patients with pancreatic cancer. We also performed subgroup analyses.

Results

With 1623 patients pooled from 10 available studies, the incorporative HR showed an unfavorable prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer in the multivariate analysis (HR = 1.55, 95%CI: 1.11–2.17, P = 0.01), but not in univariate analysis (HR = 1.41, 95%CI: 0.47–4.21, P = 0.54) and estimate (HR = 1.24, 95%CI: 0.72–2.13, P = 0.44). And this adverse impact could also be found in the subgroup analyses in multivariate analysis, especially in the stroma (HR = 1.53, 95%CI: 1.05–2.24, P = 0.03). However, the combined HR had the highly significant heterogeneity. No obvious publication bias was found.

Conclusions

SPARC might be an unfavorable indicator in patients with pancreatic cancer, especially in the stroma. More and further researches should be conducted to reveal the prognostic value of SPARC.