Association between low-dose aspirin and the risk of gastric cancer and adenoma according to a family history of gastric cancer.

This study aimed to evaluate the association between low-dose aspirin use and the risk of GC and gastric adenoma according to a family history of GC. We conducted a population-based study of 7,596,003 participants screened for GC between 2013 and 2014. Aspirin users and non-users were matched in a 1:1 ratio through propensity score matching (PSM). After PSM, 51,818 participants with a family history of GC and 359,840 without a family history of GC were analyzed (mean follow-up periods: 4.9 ± 0.8 and 4.8 ± 0.8 years, respectively). In patients with a family history of GC, aspirin use was significantly associated with a reduced risk of GC (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]=0.80; 95 % confidence interval [CI]=0.65-0.995) and gastric adenoma (aHR=0.81; 95% CI=0.69-0.94). In those without a family history of GC, aspirin use was associated with a reduced risk of gastric adenoma (aHR = 0.92; 95 % CI = 0.86-0.98), but not with that of GC (aHR = 0.99; 95 % CI = 0.90-1.08). Low-dose aspirin use was associated with a reduced risk of gastric adenoma, regardless of a family history of GC, and may play a role in the early stages of gastric carcinogenesis. However, the association between aspirin and GC was only observed in those with a family history of GC.

Mutual association between family history of gastric and colorectal cancer and risk of gastric and colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We evaluated the associations between gastric cancer (GC) family history (FH) and colorectal cancer (CRC) risk and between CRC FH and GC/gastric adenoma risk. METHODS: We used data of participants who underwent national cancer screening between 2013 and 2014. Participants with GC or CRC FH in first-degree relatives (n = 1 172 750) and those without cancer FH (n = 3 518 250) were matched 1:3 by age and gender. RESULTS: Of the 1 172 750 participants with a FH, 871 104, 264 040, and 37 606 had FHs of only GC, only CRC, and both GC and CRC, respectively. The median follow-up time was 4.8 years. GC and CRC FHs were associated with increased GC and CRC risks, respectively. GC FH was associated with CRC risk (adjusted hazard ratio 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.10), whereas CRC FH was not associated with the risk of GC or gastric adenoma. However, gastric adenoma risk increased 1.62-fold (95% CI 1.40-1.87) in participants with FHs of both GC and CRC, demonstrating a significant difference with the 1.39-fold (95% CI 1.34-1.44) increase in participants with only GC FH. Furthermore, GC risk increased by 5.32 times (95% CI 1.74-16.24) in participants with FHs of both GC and CRC in both parents and siblings. CONCLUSIONS: GC FH was significantly associated with a 5% increase in CRC risk. Although CRC FH did not increase GC risk, FH of both GC and CRC further increased the risk of gastric adenoma. FHs of GC and CRC may affect each other's neoplastic lesion risk.

Association between Age at Helicobacter pylori Eradication and the Risk of Gastric Cancer Stratified by Family History of Gastric Cancer: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.

INTRODUCTION: This study compares the risk of GC according to age at H. pylori eradication, stratified based on the presence of family history of GC using a population-based large cohort. METHOD: We analyzed individuals who underwent GC screening between 2013 and 2014 and received H. pylori eradication therapy before screening. RESULTS: Among 1,888,815 H. pylori-treated patients, 2610/294,706 and 9332/1,594,109 patients with and without a family history of GC, respectively, developed GC. After adjusting for confounders, including age at screening, the adjusted hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for GC comparison, 70-74, 65-69, 60-64, 55-59, 50-54, 45-49, and <45 years with ≥75 years at H. pylori eradication were 0.98 (0.79-1.21), 0.88 (0.74-1.05), 0.76 (0.59-0.99), 0.62 (0.44-0.88), 0.57 (0.36-0.90), 0.38 (0.22-0.66), and 0.34 (0.17-0.67), respectively, among patients with a family history of GC (p < 0.001) and 1.01 (0.91-1.13), 0.95 (0.86-1.04), 0.86 (0.75-0.98), 0.67 (0.56-0.81), 0.56 (0.44-0.71), 0.51 (0.38-0.68), and 0.33 (0.23-0.47), respectively, among patients without a family history of GC (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients with and without a family history of GC, young age at H. pylori eradication was significantly associated with a reduced risk of GC, suggesting that the early treatment of H. pylori infection can maximize GC prevention.

Association between A Family History of Colorectal Cancer and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer: A Nationwide Population-Based Study.

Large-scale Asian studies on this topic are lacking. We evaluated the CRC risk associated with family history in the Korean population. We analyzed the data of participants aged ≥40 years who underwent national cancer screening between 2013 and 2014. During a mean follow-up of 4.7 ± 0.8 years, 0.43% of the 292,467 participants with family history and 0.28% of the 1,169,868 participants without family history developed CRC. Participants with a family history in any FDR, parents only, and siblings only had a higher risk of CRC than those without family history; adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were 1.53, 1.46, and 1.61, respectively. Participants with a family history comprising both parents and siblings had an even higher risk of CRC than those without a family history (HR, 2.34). The HRs for CRC in the 40−49, 50−59, 60−69, 70−79, and ≥80 age groups with family history were 1.72, 1.74, 1.50, 1.30, and 0.78, respectively (p < 0.001). A family history of CRC in any FDR and both parents and siblings was associated with an approximately 1.5- and 2.3-fold increased risk of CRC. The effect of family history was relatively greater in the younger than the older age group.