Background: Gastric acid suppressing drugs (that is, histamine 2 receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors) could affect the risk of oesophageal or gastric adenocarcinoma but few studies are available. Aims: To study the association between long term treatment with acid suppressing drugs and the risk of oesophageal or gastric adenocarcinoma. Patients: Persons registered in the general practitioners research database in the UK and aged 40-84 years during the period 1994-2001. Methods: Population based nested case control study. Multivariable unconditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: In 4 340 207 person years of follow up, 287 patients with oesophageal adenocarcinoma, 195 with gastric cardia adenocarcinoma, and 327 with gastric non-cardia adenocarcinoma were identified, and 10 000 control persons were randomly sampled. ''Oesophageal'' indication for long term acid suppression (that is, reflux symptoms, oesophagitis, Barrett's oesophagus, or hiatal hernia) rendered a fivefold increased risk of oesophageal adenocarcinoma (odds ratio (OR) 5.42 (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.13-9.39)) while no association was observed among users with a group of other indications, including peptic ulcer and ''gastroduodenal symptoms'' (that is, gastritis, dyspepsia, indigestion, and epigastric pain) (OR 1.74 (95% CI 0.90-3.34)). ''Peptic ulcer'' indication (that is, gastric ulcer, duodenal ulcer, or unspecified peptic ulcer) was associated with a greater than fourfold increased risk of gastric noncardia adenocarcinoma among long term users )) but no such association was found in those treated for a group of other indications (that is, ''oesophageal'' or ''gastroduodenal symptoms'') (OR 1.18 (95% CI 0.60-2.32)). Conclusions: Long term pharmacological gastric acid suppression is a marker of increased risk of oesophageal and gastric adenocarcinoma. However, these associations are most likely explained by the underlying treatment indication being a risk factor for the cancer rather than an independent harmful effect of these agents per se.
Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) may be accompanied by erosive complications that are diagnosed by endoscopy. This study aimed to describe the characteristics of patients newly diagnosed with GERD who are referred for endoscopy, and the factors associated with esophageal endoscopic findings. The study included patients aged 2-79 years with a first recorded diagnosis of GERD in 1996, as identified in a previous cohort study in the UK General Practice Research database. The rate and results of endoscopy were recorded. Unconditional logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for the relationship between a range of factors and endoscopy and its findings. Of the 7159 patients with a new GERD diagnosis, 805 (11%) underwent endoscopy close to the time of first consultation for GERD. Endoscopic findings indicative of esophageal damage were recorded in 73% of these patients. Esophageal endoscopic findings were significantly more likely in males, older patients, and individuals with a history of peptic ulcer disease or gastrointestinal bleeding. Use of acid-suppressive drugs, particularly proton pump inhibitors, was inversely associated with erosive endoscopic findings. Patients with erosive endoscopic findings were more likely to start a new course of treatment with a proton pump inhibitor. In conclusion, relatively few patients are referred for endoscopy close to the first consultation for GERD and the majority of these individuals have esophageal findings. Male gender, increasing age and a history of bleeding were risk factors for esophageal complications.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.