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.     

Incidence and Risk of Proteinuria with Aflibercept in Cancer Patients: A Meta-Analysis

Background

Aflibercept is a human recombinant fusion protein with antiangiogenic effects that functions as a decoy receptor to bind vascular endothelial growth factor A. Proteinuria is one of its major adverse effects with a substantial variation in the incidence rate, and the overall risk of proteinuria has not been systematically studied. We performed a meta-analysis of published clinical trials to quantify the incidence and relative risk of proteinuria in cancer patients treated with aflibercept.

Methods

The electronic databases were searched, including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane databases, and ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) abstracts. Eligible studies were phase II and III prospective clinical trials of cancer patients treated with aflibercept with toxicity data on proteinuria. Overall incidence rates, relative risk (RR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using fixed or random effects models depending on the heterogeneity of the included studies.

Results

A total of 4,596 patients with a variety of solid tumors from 16 prospective clinical trials were included for the meta-analysis. The overall incidences of all-grade and high-grade proteinuria in cancer patients were 33.9% (95% CI: 27.3–42.1%) and 7.9% (95% CI: 6.1–10.2%). The relative risks of proteinuria of aflibercept compared to control were increased for all-grade (RR = 1.41, 95% CI: 1.13–1.77) and high-grade (RR = 6.18, 95% CI: 3.78–10.12) proteinuria. The risk of developing all-grade and high-grade proteinuria with aflibercept was substantially higher than that of bevacizumab (all-grade: RR 1.85, 95% CI: 1.63–2.11; high-grade: RR 2.37, 95% CI: 1.84–3.05).

Conclusions

Aflibercept is associated with an increased risk of developing proteinuria. Appropriate monitoring and treatment is strongly recommended to prevent potential renal damage. Future studies are still needed to investigate the risk reduction and possible use of aflibercept in cancer patients.     

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.     

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.     

Risk of Dyslipidemia Associated with VEGF/VEGFR Inhibitors: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis was performed to investigate hyperlipidemia in patients with carcinoma treated with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)/vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) inhibitors. METHODS: We searched for eligible phase II and III studies using PubMed and Embase databases. We then summarized reported occurrences of hyperlipidemia in patients with different cancers. Relative risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by Revman 5 software in meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eleven trials (4760 subjects) were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors had similar incidence of hypertriglyceridemia (RR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.24%-1.32%, P = .19), hypercholesterolemia (RR = 1.15, 95% CI = 0.42%-3.16%, P = .78), and LDL elevation (RR = 4.58, 95% CI = 0.80%-26.25%, P = .09) than control drugs, under high heterogeneity. Moreover, subgroup analyses found VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors had higher incidence of hypertriglyceridemia (RR = 1.86, 95% CI = 1.37%-2.52%, P < .001) and hypercholesterolemia (RR = 2.95, 95% CI = 2.02%-4.30%, P = .006) than blank control or placebo control drugs (placebo-controlled-group), although with lower incidence of hypertriglyceridemia (RR = 0.29, 95% CI = 0.12%-0.69%, P < .001) and hypercholesterolemia (RR = 0.39, 95% CI = 0.28%-0.56%, P < .001) than positive control drugs (positive-controlled-groups). CONCLUSION: The use of VEGF/VEGFR inhibitors, especially the multitargeted VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs), was associated with higher risk of hyperlipidemia than the use of placebo, but this risk was less than that associated with mTOR or FGFR inhibitors. It indicated that clinicians need to pay close attention to the occurrence of hyperlipidemia in VEGFR-TKIs therapies.     

Cancer Incidence and Mortality in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Human Insulin: A Cohort Study in Shanghai

Aim

The aim was to investigate the association between human insulin and cancer incidence and mortality in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes.

Methods

We recruited 8,774 insulin-naïve diabetes patients from the Shanghai Diabetes Registry (SDR). The follow-up rate was 85.4%. All subjects were divided into the insulin use cohort (n = 3,639) and the non-insulin use cohort (n = 5,135). The primary outcome was the first diagnosis of any cancer. The secondary outcome was all-cause mortality. Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate the relative risk (RR) of cancer and mortality.

Results

We observed 98 cancer events in the insulin use cohort and 170 in the non-insulin use cohort. Cancer incidence rates were 78.6 and 74.3 per 10,000 patients per year in the insulin users and the non-insulin users, respectively. No significant difference in cancer risk was observed between the two cohorts (adjusted RR = 1.20, 95% CI 0.89–1.62, P = 0.228). Regarding site-specific cancers, only the risk of liver cancer was significantly higher in the insulin users compared to that in the non-insulin users (adjusted RR = 2.84, 95% CI 1.12–7.17, P = 0.028). The risks of overall mortality (adjusted RR = 1.89, 95% CI 1.47–2.43, P<0.0001) and death from cancer (adjusted RR = 2.16, 95% CI 1.39–3.35, P = 0.001) were all significantly higher in the insulin users than in the non-insulin users.

Conclusion

There was no excess risk of overall cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes who were treated with human insulin. However, a significantly higher risk of liver cancer was found in these patients. Moreover, insulin users showed higher risks of overall and cancer mortality. Considering that individuals treated with insulin were more likely to be advanced diabetic patients, caution should be used in interpreting these results.     

Depression and Risk of Mortality in People with Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective

To examine the association between depression and all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in people with diabetes by systematically reviewing the literature and carrying out a meta-analysis of relevant longitudinal studies.

Research Design and Methods

PUBMED and PSYCINFO were searched for articles assessing mortality risk associated with depression in diabetes up until August 16, 2012. The pooled hazard ratios were calculated using random-effects models.

Results

Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, which were pooled in an overall all-cause mortality estimate, and five in a cardiovascular mortality estimate. After adjustment for demographic variables and micro- and macrovascular complications, depression was associated with an increased risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 1.46, 95% CI = 1.29–1.66), and cardiovascular mortality (HR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.11–1.73). Heterogeneity across studies was high for all-cause mortality and relatively low for cardiovascular mortality, with an I-squared of respectively 78.6% and 39.6%. Subgroup analyses showed that the association between depression and mortality not significantly change when excluding three articles presenting odds ratios, yet this decreased heterogeneity substantially (HR = 1.49, 95% CI = 1.39–1.61, I-squared = 15.1%). A comparison between type 1 and type 2 diabetes could not be undertaken, as only one study reported on type 1 diabetes specifically.

Conclusions

Depression is associated with an almost 1.5-fold increased risk of mortality in people with diabetes. Research should focus on both cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular causes of death associated with depression, and determine the underlying behavioral and physiological mechanisms that may explain this association.     

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.     

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.     

Association Between Circulating Copeptin Level and Mortality Risk in Patients with Intracerebral Hemorrhage: a Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis

Copeptin has been identified as a biomarker of disease severity and is associated with mortality risk in several common diseases. This study sought to determine the association between circulating copeptin level and mortality risk in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. PubMed, Web of Science, and Wanfang Medicine Database were searched for studies assessing the association between circulating copeptin level and mortality risk in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) of mortality was calculated and presented with 95 % confidence interval (95 % CI). Data from 1332 intracerebral hemorrhage patients were derived from 9 studies. Meta-analysis showed that intracerebral hemorrhage patients with poor prognosis had much higher copeptin levels than those survivors (standardized mean difference?=?1.68, 95 % CI 1.26–2.11, P?<?0.00001). Meta-analysis of 8 studies with HRs showed that high circulating copeptin level was associated with higher risk of mortality in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (HR?=?2.42, 95 % CI 1.60–3.65, P?<?0.0001). Meta-analysis of 6 studies with adjusted HRs showed that high circulating copeptin level was independently associated with higher risk of mortality in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage (HR?=?1.67, 95 % CI 1.26–2.22, P?=?0.0003). Our study suggests that there is an obvious association between circulating copeptin level and mortality in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage. High circulating copeptin level is independently associated with higher risk of mortality in patients with intracerebral hemorrhage.     

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.     

Effect of Flexible Sigmoidoscopy-Based Screening on Incidence and Mortality of Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have yielded varying estimates of the benefit of flexible sigmoidoscopy (FS) screening for colorectal cancer (CRC). Our objective was to more precisely estimate the effect of FS-based screening on the incidence and mortality of CRC by performing a meta-analysis of published RCTs.

Methods and Findings

Medline and Embase databases were searched for eligible articles published between 1966 and 28 May 2012. After screening 3,319 citations and 29 potentially relevant articles, two reviewers identified five RCTs evaluating the effect of FS screening on the incidence and mortality of CRC. The reviewers independently extracted relevant data; discrepancies were resolved by consensus. The quality of included studies was assessed using criteria set out by the Evidence-Based Gastroenterology Steering Group. Random effects meta-analysis was performed.The five RCTs meeting eligibility criteria were determined to be of high methodologic quality and enrolled 416,159 total subjects. Four European studies compared FS to no screening and one study from the United States compared FS to usual care. By intention to treat analysis, FS-based screening was associated with an 18% relative risk reduction in the incidence of CRC (0.82, 95% CI 0.73–0.91, p<0.001, number needed to screen [NNS] to prevent one case of CRC = 361), a 33% reduction in the incidence of left-sided CRC (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.59–0.76, p<0.001, NNS = 332), and a 28% reduction in the mortality of CRC (relative risk [RR] 0.72, 95% CI 0.65–0.80, p<0.001, NNS = 850). The efficacy estimate, the amount of benefit for those who actually adhered to the recommended treatment, suggested that FS screening reduced CRC incidence by 32% (p<0.001), and CRC-related mortality by 50% (p<0.001).Limitations of this meta-analysis include heterogeneity in the design of the included trials, absence of studies from Africa, Asia, or South America, and lack of studies comparing FS with colonoscopy or stool-based testing.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials demonstrates that FS-based screening significantly reduces the incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer in average-risk patients. Please see later in the article for the Editors'' Summary