| 1. |
- Ali Khan, Uzair, et al.
(author)
-
Personal History of Diabetes as Important as Family History of Colorectal Cancer for Risk of Colorectal Cancer : A Nationwide Cohort Study
- 2020
-
In: The American journal of gastroenterology. - : Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health). - 1572-0241 .- 0002-9270. ; 115:7, s. 1103-1109
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- INTRODUCTION: Diabetes mellitus (DM) and colorectal cancer (CRC) share some risk factors, including lifestyle and metabolic disturbances. We aimed to provide in-depth information on the association of CRC risk, especially early-onset CRC, with DM, family history of CRC, and age at DM diagnosis. METHODS: A nationwide cohort study was conducted using Swedish family cancer data sets, inpatient, and outpatient registers (follow-up: 1964-2015), including all individuals born after 1931 and their parents (12,614,256 individuals; 559,375 diabetic patients; 162,226 CRC patients). RESULTS: DM diagnosis before the age of 50 years was associated with a 1.9-fold increased risk of CRC before the age of 50 years (95% CI for standardized incidence ratio: 1.6-2.3) vs 1.3-fold risk of CRC at/after the age of 50 years (1.2-1.4). DM diagnosis before the age of 50 years in those with a family history of CRC was associated with 6.9-fold risk of CRC before the age of 50 years (4.1-12) and 1.9-fold risk of CRC at/after the age of 50 years (1.4-2.5). Diabetic patients had a similar lifetime risk of CRC before the age of 50 years (0.4%, 95% CI: 0.3%-0.4%) to those with only a family history of CRC (0.5%, 0.5%-0.5%), double that of the population (0.2%, 0.2%-0.2%). DISCUSSION: Our large cohort with valid information on DM and family history of cancer showed that DM is associated with increased risk of CRC in a magnitude close to having family history of CRC. Associations of DM and CRC family history with increased CRC risk were most prominent in young adults. These findings warrant further studies on harms, benefits, and cost-effectiveness of CRC screening in patients with diabetes, especially type 2, at earlier ages than in the general population.
|
|
| 2. |
- Ali Khan, Uzair, et al.
(author)
-
Risk of colorectal cancer in patients with diabetes mellitus : A Swedish nationwide cohort study
- 2020
-
In: PLoS Medicine. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1549-1676. ; 17:11
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence is increasing among young adults below screening age, despite the effectiveness of screening in older populations. Individuals with diabetes mellitus are at increased risk of early-onset CRC. We aimed to determine how many years earlier than the general population patients with diabetes with/without family history of CRC reach the threshold risk at which CRC screening is recommended to the general population. METHODS AND FINDINGS: A nationwide cohort study (follow-up:1964-2015) involving all Swedish residents born after 1931 and their parents was carried out using record linkage of Swedish Population Register, Cancer Registry, National Patient Register, and Multi-Generation Register. Of 12,614,256 individuals who were followed between 1964 and 2015 (51% men; age range at baseline 0-107 years), 162,226 developed CRC, and 559,375 developed diabetes. Age-specific 10-year cumulative risk curves were used to draw conclusions about how many years earlier patients with diabetes reach the 10-year cumulative risks of CRC in 50-year-old men and women (most common age of first screening), which were 0.44% and 0.41%, respectively. Diabetic patients attained the screening level of CRC risk earlier than the general Swedish population. Men with diabetes reached 0.44% risk at age 45 (5 years earlier than the recommended age of screening). In women with diabetes, the risk advancement was 4 years. Risk was more pronounced for those with additional family history of CRC (12-21 years earlier depending on sex and benchmark starting age of screening). The study limitations include lack of detailed information on diabetes type, lifestyle factors, and colonoscopy data. CONCLUSIONS: Using high-quality registers, this study is, to our knowledge, the first one that provides novel evidence-based information for risk-adapted starting ages of CRC screening for patients with diabetes, who are at higher risk of early-onset CRC than the general population.
|
|
| 3. |
- Hemminki, Kari, et al.
(author)
-
Risk of cancer in patients with medically diagnosed hay fever or allergic rhinitis.
- 2014
-
In: International Journal of Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0020-7136. ; 135:10, s. 2397-2403
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Data on allergic conditions as risk or protective factors for cancer are controversial probably because most studies have used self-reported data on mixed groups of allergies in a case-control setting. We define cancer risks in medically diagnosed hay fever/allergic rhinitis patients in a nationwide cohort study. A total of 138,723 hay fever/allergic rhinitis patients were identified from three Swedish health care databases and standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated for subsequent cancers identified from the Swedish Cancer Registry. Overall cancer risk was not changed (SIR 1.03). For individual cancers, the highest SIR was observed for nasal cancer (SIR 2.63), followed by testicular (1.46) and endocrine tumors (1.42), and kidney (1.31), prostate (1.18) and breast (1.11) cancers. The results were consistent in the three sources of data and all SIRs were above unity, albeit mainly not statistically significant. The SIRs for nervous system tumors were above unity and of borderline significance. SIRs were decreased for esophageal (0.50), liver (0.62) and lung (0.78) cancers, and the three sources of data agreed in the direction of the effect. The increased risks for testicular, renal, prostate and endocrine cancers may be explained by immunological mechanisms. Excess risk for these cancer accounts for a significant population attributable fraction. Nervous system cancers showed a borderline increase and none of the histological types were significantly decreased, providing strong evidence against the published case-control studies, which have reported protective effects. The reasons for the reduced risks for esophageal, liver and lung cancer remain to be explained.
|
|
| 4. |
- Kharazmi, Elham, et al.
(author)
-
Familial risk of pleural mesothelioma increased drastically in certain occupations : A nationwide prospective cohort study
- 2018
-
In: European Journal of Cancer. - : Elsevier BV. - 0959-8049 .- 1879-0852. ; 103, s. 1-6
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Objective: We aimed to explore the effect of occupation on familial risk of pleural mesothelioma in a nationwide cohort study design. Method: The nationwide Swedish Family-Cancer Database includes all Swedes born after 1931 and their biological parents, totalling 16.1 million individuals with about 2.3 million cancer patients. Hazards ratios (HRs) were calculated adjusting for age, sex and region of residence. Results: Having asbestos-related occupation in the absence of family history of mesothelioma increased risk of mesothelioma more than threefold (adjusted HR = 3.2, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.0–3.5). In those who had a history of mesothelioma in their first-degree relatives and an asbestos-related occupation, risk of mesothelioma dramatically increased compared with individuals without such occupations and family history (without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease [COPD] HR = 24, 95% CI: 15–39; with COPD 45, 95% CI: 15–141). In those who had a family history of mesothelioma and no history of an asbestos-related occupation, risk of mesothelioma did not show significant increase compared with those who had no family history of mesothelioma and no asbestos-related occupation (HR = 1.6; 95% CI: 0.7–3.8). Conclusion: First-degree relatives of patients with pleural mesothelioma had a drastic risk of developing this malignancy in case of certain occupations, which shows a gene–environment interaction is probable in risk of mesothelioma.
|
|
| 5. |
- Kharazmi, Elham, et al.
(author)
-
Gallstones, Cholecystectomy, and Kidney Cancer : Observational and Mendelian Randomization Results Based on Large Cohorts
- 2023
-
In: Gastroenterology. - 1528-0012. ; 165:1, s. 8-227
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND & AIMS: Gallstones (cholelithiasis) constitute a major health burden with high costs related to surgical removal of the gallbladder (cholecystectomy), generally indicated for symptomatic gallstones. The association between gallstones and cholecystectomy and kidney cancer is controversial. We comprehensively investigated this association, considering age at cholecystectomy and time from cholecystectomy to kidney cancer diagnosis, and assessed the causal effect of gallstones on kidney cancer risk by Mendelian randomization (MR).METHODS: We compared the risk of kidney cancer in cholecystectomized and noncholecystectomized patients (16.6 million in total) from the Swedish nationwide cancer, census, patient, and death registries using hazard ratios (HRs). For 2-sample and multivariable MR, we used summary statistics based on 408,567 UK Biobank participants.RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 13 years, 2627 of 627,870 cholecystectomized Swedish patients developed kidney cancer (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.12-1.22). Kidney cancer risk was particularly increased in the first 6 months after cholecystectomy (HR, 3.79; 95% CI, 3.18-4.52) and in patients cholecystectomized before age 40 years (HR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.39-1.72). MR results based on 18,417 patients with gallstones and 1788 patients with kidney cancer from the United Kingdom revealed a causal effect of gallstones on kidney cancer risk (9.6% risk increase per doubling in gallstone prevalence; 95% CI, 1.2%-18.8%).CONCLUSIONS: Both observational and causal MR estimates based on large prospective cohorts support an increased risk of kidney cancer in patients with gallstones. Our findings provide solid evidence for the compelling need to diagnostically rule out kidney cancer before and during gallbladder removal, to prioritize kidney cancer screening in patients undergoing cholecystectomy and aged 30-39 years, and to investigate the underlying mechanisms linking gallstones and kidney cancer in future studies.
|
|
| 6. |
- Kharazmi, Elham, et al.
(author)
-
Risk of Gynecological Cancers in Cholecystectomized Women : A Large Nationwide Cohort Study
- 2022
-
In: Cancers. - : MDPI AG. - 2072-6694. ; 14:6
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Gallstones affect women more frequently than men, and symptomatic gallstones are increasingly treated with surgical removal of the gallbladder (cholecystectomy). Breast, endometrial, and ovarian cancer share several risk factors with gallstones, including overweight, obesity, and exposure to female sex hormones. We intended to assess the association between chole-cystectomy and female cancer risk, which has not been comprehensively investigated. Methods: We investigated the risk of female cancers after cholecystectomy leveraging the Swedish Cancer, Population, Patient, and Death registries. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) adjusted for age, calendar period, socioeconomic status, and residential area were used to compare cancer risk in chole-cystectomized and non-cholecystectomized women. Results: During a median follow-up of 11 years, 325,106 cholecystectomized women developed 10,431 primary breast, 2888 endometrial, 1577 ovarian, and 705 cervical cancers. The risk of ovarian cancer was increased by 35% (95% confidence interval (CI) 2% to 77%) in the first 6 months after cholecystectomy. The exclusion of cancers diagnosed in the first 6 months still resulted in an increased risk of endometrial (19%, 95%CI 14% to 23%) and breast (5%, 95%CI 3% to 7%) cancer, especially in women cholecystectomized after age 50 years. By contrast, cholecystectomized women showed decreased risks of cervical (−13%, 95%CI −20% to −7%) and ovarian (−6%, 95%CI −10% to −1%) cancer. Conclusions: The risk of ovarian cancer increased by 35% in a just short period of time (6 months) following the surgery. Therefore, it is worth ruling out ovarian cancer before cholecystectomy. Women undergoing cholecystectomy showed an increased risk of breast and endometrial cancer up to 30 years after surgery. Further evaluation of the association between gallstones or gallbladder removal on female cancer risk would allow for the assessment of the need to intensify cancer screening in cholecystectomized women.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
- Liang, Qunfeng, et al.
(author)
-
Longer Interval Between First Colonoscopy With Negative Findings for Colorectal Cancer and Repeat Colonoscopy
-
In: JAMA Oncology. - 2374-2437.
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- IMPORTANCE: For individuals without a family history of colorectal cancer (CRC), colonoscopy screening every 10 years is recommended to reduce CRC incidence and mortality. However, debate exists about whether and for how long this 10-year interval could be safely expanded.OBJECTIVE: To assess how many years after a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC a second colonoscopy can be performed.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This cohort study leveraged Swedish nationwide register-based data to examine CRC diagnoses and CRC-specific mortality among individuals without a family history of CRC. The exposed group included individuals who had a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC at age 45 to 69 years between 1990 and 2016. The control group included individuals matched by sex, birth year, and baseline age (ie, the age of their matched exposed individual when the exposed individual's first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC was performed). Individuals in the control group either did not have a colonoscopy during the follow-up or underwent colonoscopy that resulted in a CRC diagnosis. Up to 18 controls were matched with each exposed individual. Individuals were followed up from 1990 to 2018, and data were analyzed from November 2022 to November 2023.EXPOSURE: A first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC, defined as a first colonoscopy without a diagnosis of colorectal polyp, adenoma, carcinoma in situ, or CRC before or within 6 months after screening.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcomes were CRC diagnosis and CRC-specific death. The 10-year standardized incidence ratio and standardized mortality ratio were calculated to compare risks of CRC and CRC-specific death in the exposed and control groups based on different follow-up screening intervals.RESULTS: The sample included 110 074 individuals (65 147 females [59.2%]) in the exposed group and 1 981 332 (1 172 646 females [59.2%]) in the control group. The median (IQR) age for individuals in both groups was 59 (52-64) years. During up to 29 years of follow-up of individuals with a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC, 484 incident CRCs and 112 CRC-specific deaths occurred. After a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC, the risks of CRC and CRC-specific death in the exposed group were significantly lower than those in their matched controls for 15 years. At 15 years after a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC, the 10-year standardized incidence ratio was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.54-0.94) and the 10-year standardized mortality ratio was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.29-0.94). In other words, the 10-year cumulative risk of CRC in year 15 in the exposed group was 72% that of the 10-year cumulative risk of CRC in the control group. Extending the colonoscopy screening interval from 10 to 15 years in individuals with a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC could miss the early detection of only 2 CRC cases and the prevention of 1 CRC-specific death per 1000 individuals, while potentially avoiding 1000 colonoscopies.CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This cohort study found that for the population without a family history of CRC, the 10-year interval between colonoscopy screenings for individuals with a first colonoscopy with findings negative for CRC could potentially be extended to 15 years. A longer interval between colonoscopy screenings could be beneficial in avoiding unnecessary invasive examinations.
|
|
| 9. |
- Mukama, Trasias, et al.
(author)
-
Familial risk of breast cancer by dynamic, accumulative, and static definitions of family history
- 2020
-
In: Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0008-543X .- 1097-0142. ; 126:12, s. 2837-2848
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: Familial breast cancer risk studies usually overlook the dynamic nature of family history. Methods: The authors assessed the effect of incorporating the timing of cancer diagnosis events into the assessment of familial risks of breast cancer in first-degree and second-degree relatives in a nationwide cohort study of 5,099,172 women (follow-up was between 1958-2015). Family history was assessed using 3 approaches: 1) as a static variable (ever having a relative with breast cancer); 2) as accumulative history; and 3) as a dynamic variable (time-dependent variable). Results: For women aged <50 years, familial risk was mostly higher when family history was assessed as a dynamic variable compared with using a static or accumulative family history. For example, the cumulative risk of receiving a breast cancer diagnosis until age 50 years for women with a history of breast cancer in 1 first-degree relative was 2.6% (95% CI, 2.5%-2.7%) using the static method, 2.4% (95% CI, 2.3%-2.4%) using the accumulative method, and 3.1% (95% CI, 3.0%-3.2%) using the dynamic method. Relative risk in women aged <50 years with a breast cancer diagnosis in a sister was 1.40-fold (95% CI, 1.31-fold to 1.48-fold) using the static method, 1.66-fold (95% CI, 1.57-fold to 1.76-fold) using the accumulative method, and 2.28-fold (95% CI, 2.07-fold to 2.51-fold) using the dynamic method. Conclusions: The results of the current study demonstrated that assessing family history as static, accumulative, or dynamic results in different familial risk estimates. The answer as to which method to use for family history assessment depends on the implications of the study, with the dynamic method appearing to be better suited for risk stratification studies, the accumulative method being the most convenient in practice and the least favored for risk prediction, and the static method being suitable for etiological impact and risk attribution studies.
|
|
| 10. |
- Mukama, Trasias, et al.
(author)
-
Risk-adapted starting age of breast cancer screening in women with a family history of ovarian or other cancers : A nationwide cohort study
- 2021
-
In: Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0008-543X .- 1097-0142. ; 127:12, s. 2091-2098
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: There is a lack of evidence-based recommendations for the age at which women with a family history of cancers other than breast cancer should start breast cancer screening. METHODS: Using Swedish family cancer data sets, the authors conducted a nationwide cohort study including 5,099,172 Swedish women born after 1931 (follow-up, 1958-2015). Accounting for calendar time, they calculated the relative risk of breast cancer for women with a family history of a discordant cancer in 1 first-degree relative. Furthermore, the authors used 10-year cumulative risk to determine the ages at which women with a family history of discordant cancer reached risk thresholds at which women in the general population were recommended to start breast cancer screening. RESULTS: A family history of cancer at 15 sites was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Among women younger than 50 years, the highest risk of breast cancer was observed for those with a family history of ovarian cancer (standardized incidence ratio, 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-1.64). In these women, the risk of breast cancer associated with a family history at other cancer sites ranged from 1.08-fold for prostate cancer to 1.18-fold for liver cancer. When breast cancer screening was recommended to be started at the age of 50 years for the general population, women with 1 first-degree relative with ovarian cancer attained the threshold risk for screening at the age of 46 years. Women with a family history of other discordant cancers did not reach the risk thresholds for screening at younger ages. CONCLUSIONS: Many cancers showed familial associations with breast cancer, but women with a family history of these cancers (except for ovarian cancer) did not reach risk thresholds for screening at younger ages.
|
|
