Hormonal and reproductive factors and risk of upper gastrointestinal cancers in men: A prospective cohort study within the UK Biobank.

Incidence of upper gastrointestinal cancers of the oesophagus and stomach show a strong unexplained male predominance. Hormonal and reproductive factors have been associated with upper gastrointestinal cancers in women but there is little available data on men. To investigate this, we included 219,425 men enrolled in the UK Biobank in 2006-2010. Baseline assessments provided information on hormonal and reproductive factors (specifically hair baldness, number of children fathered, relative age at first facial hair and relative age voice broke) and incident oesophageal or gastric cancers were identified through linkage to U.K. cancer registries. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. During 8 years of follow-up, 309 oesophageal 210 gastric cancers occurred. There was some evidence that male pattern baldness, was associated with gastric cancer risk (adjusted HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.97, 1.88), particularly for frontal male pattern baldness (adjusted HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.02, 2.28). There was little evidence of association between other hormonal and reproductive factors and risk of oesophageal or gastric cancer, overall or by histological subtype. In the first study of a range of male hormonal and reproductive factors and gastric cancer, there was a suggestion that male pattern baldness, often used as a proxy of sex hormone levels, may be associated with gastric cancer. Future prospective studies that directly test circulating sex steroid hormone levels in relation to upper gastrointestinal cancer risk are warranted.

Commonly used medications and endometrial cancer survival: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Increasing incidence and new indications for existing drugs make it important to identify new adjuvant therapies for endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study of 3058 newly diagnosed EC cases from 1998 to 2010, identified through record linkages between the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, the National Cancer Research Datalink and death registrations from the Office of National Statistics. Using Cox regression models, unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for EC-specific survival. RESULTS: Over a mean 6.1 (range 1-16) years of follow-up, there were 394 EC-specific deaths. There was no evidence of a significant association between post-diagnostic use of statins (adjusted HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.64, 1.08), ß-blockers (adjusted HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.65, 1.13) or low-dose aspirin (adjusted HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.69, 1.20) and EC survival before or after adjustment for confounders. There were also no evidence of a dose-response association between these drug groups and EC survival. CONCLUSIONS: In this large UK population-based study, no significant associations were observed for post-diagnostic use of statins, ß-blockers or low-dose aspirin and EC survival.

Metformin use and survival after colorectal cancer: A population-based cohort study.

Preclinical evidence suggests that metformin could delay cancer progression. Previous epidemiological studies however have been limited by small sample sizes and certain time-related biases. This study aimed to investigate whether colorectal cancer patients with type 2 diabetes who were exposed to metformin had reduced cancer-specific mortality. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1,197 colorectal cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2009 (identified from English cancer registries) with type 2 diabetes (based upon Clinical Practice Research Datalink, CPRD, prescription and diagnosis records). In this cohort 382 colorectal cancer-specific deaths occurred up to 2012 from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) mortality data. Metformin use was identified from CPRD prescription records. Using time-dependent Cox regression models, unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were calculated for the association between post-diagnostic exposure to metformin and colorectal cancer-specific mortality. Overall, there was no evidence of an association between metformin use and cancer-specific death before or after adjustment for potential confounders (adjusted HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.80, 1.40). In addition, after adjustment for confounders, there was also no evidence of associations between other diabetic medications and cancer-specific mortality including sulfonylureas (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.86, 1.51), insulin use (HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.95, 1.93) or other anti-diabetic medications including thiazolidinediones (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46, 1.14). Similar associations were observed by duration of use and for all-cause mortality. This population-based study, the largest to date, does not support a protective association between metformin and survival in colorectal cancer patients.

Statin use and breast cancer survival: a nationwide cohort study in Scotland.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical evidence suggests that statins could delay cancer progression. Previous epidemiological findings have been inconsistent and some have been limited by small sample sizes, as well as certain time-related biases. This study aimed to investigate whether breast cancer patients who were exposed to statins had reduced breast cancer-specific mortality. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 15,140 newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer patients diagnosed from 2009 to 2012 within the Scottish Cancer Registry. Dispensed medication usage was obtained from linkages to the Scottish Prescribing Information System and breast cancer-specific deaths were identified from National Records of Scotland Death Records. Using time-dependent Cox regression models, hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the association between post-diagnostic exposure to statins (including simvastatin) and breast cancer-specific mortality. Adjustments were made for a range of potential confounders including age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, cancer stage, grade, cancer treatments received, comorbidities, socioeconomic status and use of aspirin. RESULTS: A total of 1,190 breast cancer-specific deaths occurred up to January 2015. Overall, after adjustment for potential confounders, there was no evidence of an association between statin use and breast cancer-specific death (adjusted HR 0.93, 95 % CI 0.77, 1.12). No significant associations were observed in dose-response analyses or in analysis of all-cause mortality. For simvastatin use specifically, a weak non-significant reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality was observed compared to non-users (adjusted HR 0.89, 95 % CI 0.73, 1.08). Statin use before diagnosis was weakly associated with a reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR 0.85, 95 % CI 0.74, 0.98). CONCLUSION: Overall, we found little evidence of a protective association between post-diagnostic statin use and cancer-specific mortality in a large nation-wide cohort of breast cancer patients. These findings will help inform the decision whether to conduct randomised controlled trials of statins as an adjuvant treatment in breast cancer.

Digoxin use after diagnosis of breast cancer and survival: a population-based cohort study.

Digoxin has been shown to have an estrogenic effect and is associated with increased risk of gynecomastia and estrogen-sensitive cancers such as breast and uterus cancer. These findings, particularly recent observations of increased breast cancer risk, raise questions about the safety of digoxin use in breast cancer patients. Therefore, we investigated whether digoxin use after breast cancer diagnosis increased the risk of breast cancer-specific mortality in breast cancer patients. A cohort of 17,842 breast cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2009 was identified from English cancer registries (from the National Cancer Data Repository). This cohort was linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (to provide digoxin and other prescription records) and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (to identify breast cancer-specific deaths). Using time-dependent Cox regression models, unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the association between post-diagnostic exposure to digoxin and breast cancer-specific and all-cause mortality. In 17,842 breast cancer patients, there were 2219 breast cancer-specific deaths. Digoxin users appeared to have increased breast cancer-specific mortality compared with non-users (HR 1.73; 95 % CI 1.39-2.15) but this association was entirely attenuated after adjustment for potential confounders (adjusted HR 0.91; 95 % CI 0.72-1.14). In this large population-based breast cancer cohort study, there was little evidence of an increase in breast cancer-specific mortality with digoxin use after diagnosis. These results provide some reassurance that digoxin use is safe in breast cancer patients.

Low-dose aspirin and survival from lung cancer: a population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical evidence suggests that aspirin may inhibit lung cancer progression. In a large cohort of lung cancer patients, we investigated whether low-dose aspirin use was associated with a reduction in the risk of lung cancer-specific mortality. METHODS: We identified lung cancer patients from English cancer registries diagnosed between 1998 to 2009 from the National Cancer Data Repository. Medication usage was obtained from linkages to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and lung cancer-specific deaths were identified from Office of National Statistics mortality data. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for the association between low-dose aspirin use (before and after diagnosis) and risk of lung cancer-specific mortality were calculated using Cox regression models. RESULTS: A total of 14,735 lung cancer patients were identified during the study period. In analysis of 3,635 lung cancer patients, there was no suggestion of an association between low-dose aspirin use after diagnosis and cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR=0.96, 95% CI: 0.85, 1.09). Similarly, no association was evident for low-dose aspirin use before diagnosis and cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR=1.00, 95% CI: 0.95, 1.05). Associations were comparable by duration of use and for all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION: Overall, we found little evidence of a protective association between low-dose aspirin use and cancer-specific mortality in a large population-based lung cancer cohort.

Drugs affecting the renin-angiotensin system and survival from cancer: a population based study of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer patient cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) are commonly prescribed to the growing number of cancer patients (more than two million in the UK alone) often to treat hypertension. However, increased fatal cancer in ARB users in a randomized trial and increased breast cancer recurrence rates in ACEI users in a recent observational study have raised concerns about their safety in cancer patients. We investigated whether ACEI or ARB use after breast, colorectal or prostate cancer diagnosis was associated with increased risk of cancer-specific mortality. METHODS: Population-based cohorts of 9,814 breast, 4,762 colorectal and 6,339 prostate cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2006 were identified in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and confirmed by cancer registry linkage. Cancer-specific and all-cause mortality were identified from Office of National Statistics mortality data in 2011 (allowing up to 13 years of follow-up). A nested case-control analysis was conducted to compare ACEI/ARB use (from general practitioner prescription records) in cancer patients dying from cancer with up to five controls (not dying from cancer). Conditional logistic regression estimated the risk of cancer-specific, and all-cause, death in ACEI/ARB users compared with non-users. RESULTS: The main analysis included 1,435 breast, 1,511 colorectal and 1,184 prostate cancer-specific deaths (and 7,106 breast, 7,291 colorectal and 5,849 prostate cancer controls). There was no increase in cancer-specific mortality in patients using ARBs after diagnosis of breast (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.06 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.84, 1.35), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.82 95% CI 0.64, 1.07) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.79 95% CI 0.61, 1.03). There was also no evidence of increases in cancer-specific mortality with ACEI use for breast (adjusted OR = 1.06 95% CI 0.89, 1.27), colorectal (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92) or prostate cancer (adjusted OR = 0.78 95% CI 0.66, 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we found no evidence of increased risks of cancer-specific mortality in breast, colorectal or prostate cancer patients who used ACEI or ARBs after diagnosis. These results provide some reassurance that these medications are safe in patients diagnosed with these cancers.

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers in cancer progression and survival: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) and disease progression and survival in cancer patients. METHODS: Using terms for cancer and ACEIs/ARBs, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science were systematically searched for observational/interventional studies that used clinically relevant outcomes for cancer progression and survival. RESULTS: Ten studies met the inclusion criteria. Two studies showed a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) with ACEI/ARB use among patients with advanced pancreatic (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.29-0.88) and non-small cell lung cancer (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33-0.95). An improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) was also reported for pancreatic cancer patients (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.34-0.95) and patients with renal cell carcinoma (HR 0.54, p = 0.02). ACEI/ARB use was protective against breast cancer recurrence (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.37-0.96), colorectal cancer distant metastasis (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.08-0.65) and prostate specific antigen (PSA) failure in prostate cancer patients (p = 0.034). One study observed a worse OS (HR 2.01, 95% CI 1.00-4.05) and PFS in ACEI users with multiple myeloma (p = 0.085) while another reported an increased risk of breast cancer recurrence (HR = 1.56, 95% CI 1.02-2.39). CONCLUSION: There is some evidence to suggest that ACEI or ARB use may be associated with improved outcomes in cancer patients. Larger, more robust studies are required to explore this relationship further.

Low-dose aspirin use and survival in breast cancer patients: A nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical evidence from breast cancer cell lines and animal models suggest that aspirin could have anti-cancer properties. In a large breast cancer patient cohort, we investigated whether post-diagnostic low-dose aspirin use was associated with a reduction in the risk of breast cancer-specific mortality. METHODS: We identified 15,140 newly diagnosed breast cancer patients within the Scottish Cancer Registry. Linkages to the Scottish Prescribing Information System provided data on dispensed medications and breast cancer-specific deaths were identified from National Records of Scotland Death Records. Time-dependent Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs for breast cancer-specific and all-cause mortality by post-diagnostic low-dose aspirin use. HRs were adjusted for a range of potential confounders including age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, cancer stage, grade, cancer treatments received, comorbidities, socioeconomic status and use of statins. Secondary analysis investigated the association between pre-diagnostic low-dose aspirin use and breast cancer-specific and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Post-diagnostic users of low-dose aspirin appeared to have increased breast cancer-specific mortality compared with non-users (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.26, 1.65) but this association was entirely attenuated after adjustment for potential confounders (adjusted HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.75, 1.14). Findings were similar in analysis by increasing duration of use and in analysis of pre-diagnostic low-dose aspirin use. CONCLUSION: In this large nationwide study of breast cancer patients, we found little evidence of an association between post-diagnostic low-dose aspirin use and cancer-specific mortality.