| 1. |
- Rota, M, et al.
(författare)
-
Erratum
- 2020
-
Ingår i: International journal of cancer. - : Wiley. - 1097-0215 .- 0020-7136. ; 146:11, s. E6-E6
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)
|
|
| 2. |
- Vitelli-Storelli, F, et al.
(författare)
-
Family History and Gastric Cancer Risk: A Pooled Investigation in the Stomach Cancer Pooling (STOP) Project Consortium
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Cancers. - : MDPI AG. - 2072-6694. ; 13:15
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Although there is a clear relationship between family history (FH) and the risk of gastric cancer (GC), quantification is still needed in relation to different histological types and anatomical sites, and in strata of covariates. The objective was to analyze the risk of GC according to first-degree FH in a uniquely large epidemiological consortium of GC. This investigation includes 5946 cases and 12,776 controls from 17 studies of the Stomach Cancer Pooling (StoP) Project consortium. Summary odds ratios (OR) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by pooling study-specific ORs using fixed-effect model meta-analysis techniques. Stratified analyses were carried out by sex, age, tumor location and histological type, smoking habit, socioeconomic status, alcohol intake and fruit consumption. The pooled OR for GC was 1.84 (95% CI: 1.64–2.04; I2 = 6.1%, P heterogeneity = 0.383) in subjects with vs. those without first-degree relatives with GC. No significant differences were observed among subgroups of sex, age, geographic area or study period. Associations tended to be stronger for non-cardia (OR = 1.82; 95% CI: 1.59–2.05 for subjects with FH) than for cardia GC (OR = 1.38; 95% CI: 0.98–1.77), and for the intestinal (OR = 1.92; 95% CI: 1.62–2.23) than for the diffuse histotype (OR = 1.62; 95% CI: 1.28–1.96). This analysis confirms the effect of FH on the risk of GC, reporting an approximately doubled risk, and provides further quantification of the risk of GC according to the subsite and histotype. Considering these findings, accounting for the presence of FH to carry out correct prevention and diagnosis measures is of the utmost importance.
|
|
| 3. |
- Collatuzzo, G, et al.
(författare)
-
Peptic ulcer as mediator of the association between risk of gastric cancer and socioeconomic status, tobacco smoking, alcohol drinking and salt intake
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Journal of epidemiology and community health. - : BMJ. - 1470-2738 .- 0143-005X. ; 76:10, s. 861-866
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) and gastric cancer (GC) are more prevalent in individuals with low socioeconomic status (SES) and share several risk factors. The aim of this study was to investigate the mediating role of PUD in the association between established risk factors and GC.MethodsWe conducted a pooled analysis of 12 studies from the Stomach Cancer Pooling Project Consortium, including a total of 4877 GC cases and 11 808 controls. We explored the mediating role of PUD in the association between SES, tobacco smoking, heavy alcohol drinking and salt intake, and GC. Also, we assessed the ORs and 95% CIs of the risk factors and both PUD and GC.ResultsPUD mediated 36% of the smoking effect mainly among men. Other risk factors were only slightly mediated by PUD (SES, 5.3%; heavy alcohol drinking, 3.3%; and salt intake, 2.5%). No significant difference was found when excluding PUD diagnosed within 2 years from GC.ConclusionsOur study provides innovative information on the mechanism of stomach mucosal damage leading to PUD and GC, with respect to the effect of tobacco smoking in particular.
|
|
| 4. |
- Ferro, Ana, et al.
(författare)
-
Fruits and vegetables intake and gastric cancer risk : A pooled analysis within the Stomach cancer Pooling Project.
- 2020
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Cancer. - : Wiley. - 0020-7136 .- 1097-0215. ; 147:11, s. 3090-3101
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A low intake of fruits and vegetables is a risk factor for gastric cancer, although there is uncertainty regarding the magnitude of the associations. In our study, the relationship between fruits and vegetables intake and gastric cancer was assessed, complementing a previous work on the association betweenconsumption of citrus fruits and gastric cancer. Data from 25 studies (8456 cases and 21 133 controls) with information on fruits and/or vegetables intake were used. A two-stage approach based on random-effects models was used to pool study-specific adjusted (sex, age and the main known risk factors for gastric cancer) odds ratios (ORs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Exposure-response relations, including linear and nonlinear associations, were modeled using one- and two-order fractional polynomials. Gastric cancer risk was lower for a higher intake of fruits (OR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.64-0.90), noncitrus fruits (OR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.73-1.02), vegetables (OR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.56-0.84), and fruits and vegetables (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.49-0.75); results were consistent across sociodemographic and lifestyles categories, as well as study characteristics. Exposure-response analyses showed an increasingly protective effect of portions/day of fruits (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.57-0.73 for six portions), noncitrus fruits (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.61-0.83 for six portions) and vegetables (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.43-0.60 for 10 portions). A protective effect of all fruits, noncitrus fruits and vegetables was confirmed, supporting further dietary recommendations to decrease the burden of gastric cancer.
|
|
| 5. |
- Rota, Matteo, et al.
(författare)
-
Education and gastric cancer risk-An individual participant data meta-analysis in the StoP project consortium
- 2020
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Cancer. - : WILEY. - 0020-7136 .- 1097-0215. ; 146:3, s. 671-681
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Low socioeconomic position (SEP) is a strong risk factor for incidence and premature mortality from several cancers. Our study aimed at quantifying the association between SEP and gastric cancer (GC) risk through an individual participant data meta-analysis within the "Stomach cancer Pooling (StoP) Project". Educational level and household income were used as proxies for the SEP. We estimated pooled odds ratios (ORs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) across levels of education and household income by pooling study-specific ORs through random-effects meta-analytic models. The relative index of inequality (RII) was also computed. A total of 9,773 GC cases and 24,373 controls from 25 studies from Europe, Asia and America were included. The pooled OR for the highest compared to the lowest level of education was 0.60 (95% CI, 0.44-0.84), while the pooled RII was 0.45 (95% CI, 0.29-0.69). A strong inverse association was observed both for noncardia (OR 0.39, 95% CI, 0.22-0.70) and cardia GC (OR 0.47, 95% CI, 0.22-0.99). The relation was stronger among H. pylori negative subjects (RII 0.14, 95% CI, 0.04-0.48) as compared to H. pylori positive ones (RII 0.29, 95% CI, 0.10-0.84), in the absence of a significant interaction (p = 0.28). The highest household income category showed a pooled OR of 0.65 (95% CI, 0.48-0.89), while the corresponding RII was 0.40 (95% CI, 0.22-0.72). Our collaborative pooled-analysis showed a strong inverse relationship between SEP indicators and GC risk. Our data call for public health interventions to reduce GC risk among the more vulnerable groups of the population. What's new? Gastric cancer is associated with low socioeconomic position but the precise impact of education on gastric cancer risk needs to be quantified. Here the authors provide an updated quantification through the analysis of the Stomach cancer Pooling (StoP) Project, a large international consortium of case-control studies. They observe a similar to 40% decreased risk of gastric cancer among individuals with intermediate/high education status as compared to less educated study subjects. The association was evident regardless of Helicobacter pylori infection, underscoring the need for public health interventions to reduce gastric cancer risk.
|
|
