Cigar and pipe smoking,smokeless tobacco use and pancreatic cancer: an analysis from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4)

BackgroundCigarette smoking is the best-characterized risk factor for pancreatic cancer. However, data are limited for other tobacco smoking products and smokeless tobacco.Materials and methodsWe conducted a pooled analysis of cigar and pipe smoking and smokeless tobacco use and risk of pancreatic cancer using data from 11 case–control studies (6056 cases and 11 338 controls) within the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4). Pooled odds ratios (OR) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated by unconditional multiple logistic regression models adjusted for study center and selected covariates.ResultsCompared with never tobacco users, the OR for cigar-only smokers was 1.6 (95% CI: 1.2–2.3), i.e. comparable to that of cigarette-only smokers (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.4–1.6). The OR was 1.1 (95% CI 0.69–1.6) for pipe-only smokers. There was some evidence of increasing risk with increasing amount of cigar smoked per day (OR 1.82 for ≥ 10 grams of tobacco), although not with duration. The OR for ever smokeless tobacco users as compared with never tobacco users was 0.98 (95% CI 0.75–1.3).ConclusionThis collaborative analysis provides evidence that cigar smoking is associated with an excess risk of pancreatic cancer, while no significant association emerged for pipe smoking and smokeless tobacco use.     

Pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer risk: a pooled analysis in the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4)

BackgroundPancreatitis is a known risk factor for pancreatic cancer; however, an unknown fraction of the disease is thought to be a consequence of tumor-related duct obstruction.Patients and methodsA pooled analysis of a history of pancreatitis and risk of pancreatic cancer was carried out considering the time interval between diagnoses and potential modification by covariates. Adjusted pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated from 10 case–control studies (5048 cases of ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma and 10 947 controls) taking part in the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium (PanC4).ResultsThe association between pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer was nearly three-fold at intervals of >2 years between diagnoses (OR: 2.71, 95% CI: 1.96–3.74) and much stronger at intervals of ≤2 years (OR: 13.56, 95% CI: 8.72–21.90) probably reflecting a combination of reverse causation and antecedent misdiagnosis of pancreas cancer as pancreatitis. The younger (<65 years) pancreatic cancer cases showed stronger associations with previous (>2 years) pancreatitis (OR: 3.91, 95% CI: 2.53–6.04) than the older (≥65 years) cases (OR: 1.68, 95% CI: 1.02–2.76; P value for interaction: 0.006).ConclusionsDespite a moderately strong association between pancreatitis (diagnosed before >2 years) and pancreatic cancer, the population attributable fraction was estimated at 1.34% (95% CI: 0.612–2.07%), suggesting that a relatively small proportion of pancreatic cancer might be avoided if pancreatitis could be prevented.     

Diabetes,antidiabetic medications,and pancreatic cancer risk: an analysis from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium

BackgroundType 2 diabetes mellitus has been associated with an excess risk of pancreatic cancer, but the magnitude of the risk and the time–risk relationship are unclear, and there is limited information on the role of antidiabetic medications.Patients and methodsWe analyzed individual-level data from 15 case–control studies within the Pancreatic Cancer Case-Control Consortium, including 8305 cases and 13 987 controls. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were estimated from multiple logistic regression models, adjusted for relevant covariates.ResultsOverall, 1155 (15%) cases and 1087 (8%) controls reported a diagnosis of diabetes 2 or more years before cancer diagnosis (or interview, for controls), corresponding to an OR of 1.90 (95% confidence interval, CI, 1.72–2.09). Consistent risk estimates were observed across strata of selected covariates, including body mass index and tobacco smoking. Pancreatic cancer risk decreased with duration of diabetes, but a significant excess risk was still evident 20 or more years after diabetes diagnosis (OR 1.30, 95% CI 1.03–1.63). Among diabetics, long duration of oral antidiabetic use was associated with a decreased pancreatic cancer risk (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14–0.69, for ≥15 years). Conversely, insulin use was associated with a pancreatic cancer risk in the short term (OR 5.60, 95% CI 3.75–8.35, for <5 years), but not for longer duration of use (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.53–1.70, for ≥15 years).ConclusionThis study provides the most definitive quantification to date of an excess risk of pancreatic cancer among diabetics. It also shows that a 30% excess risk persists for more than two decades after diabetes diagnosis, thus supporting a causal role of diabetes in pancreatic cancer. Oral antidiabetics may decrease the risk of pancreatic cancer, whereas insulin showed an inconsistent duration–risk relationship.     

Ulcer,gastric surgery and pancreatic cancer risk: an analysis from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case–Control Consortium (PanC4)

BackgroundPeptic ulcer and its treatments have been associated to pancreatic cancer risk, although the evidence is inconsistent.MethodsWe pooled 10 case–control studies within the Pancreatic Cancer Case–control Consortium (PanC4), including 4717 pancreatic cancer cases and 9374 controls, and estimated summary odds ratios (OR) using multivariable logistic regression models.ResultsThe OR for pancreatic cancer was 1.10 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98–1.23] for history of ulcer (OR = 1.08 for gastric and 0.97 for duodenal ulcer). The association was stronger for a diagnosis within 2 years before cancer diagnosis (OR = 2.43 for peptic, 1.75 for gastric, and 1.98 for duodenal ulcer). The OR was 1.53 (95% CI 1.15–2.03) for history of gastrectomy; however, the excess risk was limited to a gastrectomy within 2 years before cancer diagnosis (OR = 6.18, 95% CI 1.82–20.96), while no significant increased risk was observed for longer time since gastrectomy. No associations were observed for pharmacological treatments for ulcer, such as antacids, H2-receptor antagonists, or proton-pump inhibitors.ConclusionsThis uniquely large collaborative study does not support the hypothesis that peptic ulcer and its treatment materially affect pancreatic cancer risk. The increased risk for short-term history of ulcer and gastrectomy suggests that any such association is due to increased cancer surveillance.     

Vitamin D and pancreatic cancer: a pooled analysis from the Pancreatic Cancer Case–Control Consortium

BackgroundThe potential role of vitamin D in the aetiology of pancreatic cancer is unclear, with recent studies suggesting both positive and negative associations.Patients and methodsWe used data from nine case–control studies from the International Pancreatic Cancer Case–Control Consortium (PanC4) to examine associations between pancreatic cancer risk and dietary vitamin D intake. Study-specific odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using multivariable logistic regression, and ORs were then pooled using a random-effects model. From a subset of four studies, we also calculated pooled estimates of association for supplementary and total vitamin D intake.ResultsRisk of pancreatic cancer increased with dietary intake of vitamin D [per 100 international units (IU)/day: OR = 1.13, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07–1.19, P = 7.4 × 10^-6, P-heterogeneity = 0.52; ≥230 versus <110 IU/day: OR = 1.31, 95% CI 1.10–1.55, P = 2.4 × 10^-3, P-heterogeneity = 0.81], with the association possibly stronger in people with low retinol/vitamin A intake.ConclusionIncreased risk of pancreatic cancer was observed with higher levels of dietary vitamin D intake. Additional studies are required to determine whether or not our finding has a causal basis.     

Cannabis smoking and lung cancer risk: Pooled analysis in the International Lung Cancer Consortium

To investigate the association between cannabis smoking and lung cancer risk, data on 2,159 lung cancer cases and 2,985 controls were pooled from 6 case‐control studies in the US, Canada, UK, and New Zealand within the International Lung Cancer Consortium. Study‐specific associations between cannabis smoking and lung cancer were estimated using unconditional logistic regression adjusting for sociodemographic factors, tobacco smoking status and pack‐years; odds‐ratio estimates were pooled using random effects models. Subgroup analyses were done for sex, histology and tobacco smoking status. The shapes of dose‐response associations were examined using restricted cubic spline regression. The overall pooled OR for habitual versus nonhabitual or never users was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.66–1.38). Compared to nonhabitual or never users, the summary OR was 0.88 (95%CI: 0.63–1.24) for individuals who smoked 1 or more joint‐equivalents of cannabis per day and 0.94 (95%CI: 0.67–1.32) for those consumed at least 10 joint‐years. For adenocarcinoma cases the ORs were 1.73 (95%CI: 0.75–4.00) and 1.74 (95%CI: 0.85–3.55), respectively. However, no association was found for the squamous cell carcinoma based on small numbers. Weak associations between cannabis smoking and lung cancer were observed in never tobacco smokers. Spline modeling indicated a weak positive monotonic association between cumulative cannabis use and lung cancer, but precision was low at high exposure levels. Results from our pooled analyses provide little evidence for an increased risk of lung cancer among habitual or long‐term cannabis smokers, although the possibility of potential adverse effect for heavy consumption cannot be excluded.     

Cigarette smoking and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a pooled analysis from the International Lymphoma Epidemiology Consortium (interlymph).

BACKGROUND: The International Lymphoma Epidemiology Consortium (InterLymph) provides an opportunity to analyze the relationship between cigarette smoking and non-Hodgkin lymphoma with sufficient statistical power to consider non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtype. The results from previous studies of this relationship have been inconsistent, likely due to the small sample sizes that arose from stratification by disease subtype. To clarify the role of cigarette smoking in the etiology of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, we conducted a pooled analysis of original patient data from nine case-control studies of non-Hodgkin lymphoma conducted in the United States, Europe, and Australia. METHODS: Original data were obtained from each study and uniformly coded. Risk estimates from fixed-effects and two-stage random-effects models were compared to determine the impact of interstudy heterogeneity. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were derived from unconditional logistic regression models, controlling for study center, age, sex, and race. RESULTS: In our pooled study population of 6,594 cases and 8,892 controls, smoking was associated with slightly increased risk estimates (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.00-1.15). Stratification by non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtype revealed that the most consistent association between cigarette smoking and non-Hodgkin lymphoma was observed among follicular lymphomas (n = 1452). Compared with nonsmokers, current smokers had a higher OR for follicular lymphoma (1.31; 95% CI, 1.12-1.52) than former smokers (1.06; 95% CI, 0.93-1.22). Current heavy smoking (> or = 36 pack-years) was associated with a 45% increased OR for follicular lymphoma (1.45; 95% CI, 1.15-1.82) compared with nonsmokers. CONCLUSIONS: Cigarette smoking may increase the risk of developing follicular lymphoma but does not seem to affect risk of the other non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtypes we examined. Future research is needed to determine the biological mechanism responsible for our subtype-specific results.     

Cigarette smoking and risk of Hodgkin lymphoma and its subtypes: a pooled analysis from the International Lymphoma Epidemiology Consortium (InterLymph)

BackgroundThe etiology of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) remains incompletely characterized. Studies of the association between smoking and HL have yielded ambiguous results, possibly due to differences between HL subtypes.Patients and methodsThrough the InterLymph Consortium, 12 case–control studies regarding cigarette smoking and HL were identified. Pooled analyses on the association between smoking and HL stratified by tumor histology and Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) status were conducted using random effects models adjusted for confounders. Analyses included 3335 HL cases and 14 278 controls.ResultsOverall, 54.5% of cases and 57.4% of controls were ever cigarette smokers. Compared with never smokers, ever smokers had an odds ratio (OR) of HL of 1.10 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01–1.21]. This increased risk reflected associations with mixed cellularity cHL (OR = 1.60, 95% CI 1.29–1.99) and EBV-positive cHL (OR = 1.81, 95% CI 1.27–2.56) among current smokers, whereas risk of nodular sclerosis (OR = 1.09, 95% CI 0.90–1.32) and EBV-negative HL (OR = 1.02, 95% CI 0.72–1.44) was not increased.ConclusionThese results support the notion of etiologic heterogeneity between HL subtypes, highlighting the need for HL stratification in future studies. Even if not relevant to all subtypes, our study emphasizes that cigarette smoking should be added to the few modifiable HL risk factors identified.     

Hormone use and risk for lung cancer: a pooled analysis from the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO)

Background:

The association between oral contraceptive (OC) use, hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and lung cancer risk in women is still debated.

Methods:

We performed a pooled analysis of six case–control studies (1961 cases and 2609 controls) contributing to the International Lung Cancer Consortium. Potential associations were investigated with multivariable unconditional logistic regression and meta-analytic models. Multinomial logistic regressions were performed to investigate lung cancer risk across histologic types.

Results:

A reduced lung cancer risk was found for OC (odds ratio (OR)=0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68–0.97) and HRT ever users (OR=0.77; 95% CI: 0.66–0.90). Both oestrogen only and oestrogen+progestin HRT were associated with decreased risk (OR=0.76; 95% CI: 0.61–0.94, and OR=0.66; 95% CI: 0.49–0.88, respectively). No dose-response relationship was observed with years of OC/HRT use. The greatest risk reduction was seen for squamous cell carcinoma (OR=0.53; 95% CI: 0.37–0.76) in OC users and in both adenocarcinoma (OR=0.79; 95% CI: 0.66–0.95) and small cell carcinoma (OR=0.37; 95% CI: 0.19–0.71) in HRT users. No interaction with smoking status or BMI was observed.

Conclusion:

Our findings suggest that exogenous hormones can play a protective role in lung cancer aetiology. However, given inconsistencies with epidemiological evidence from cohort studies, further and larger investigations are needed for a more comprehensive view of lung cancer development in women.     

Lung cancer and DNA repair genes: multilevel association analysis from the International Lung Cancer Consortium

Lung cancer (LC) is the leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide and tobacco smoking is the major associated risk factor. DNA repair is an important process, maintaining genome integrity and polymorphisms in DNA repair genes may contribute to susceptibility to LC. To explore the role of DNA repair genes in LC, we conducted a multilevel association study with 1655 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in 211 DNA repair genes using 6911 individuals pooled from four genome-wide case-control studies. Single SNP association corroborates previous reports of association with rs3131379, located on the gene MSH5 (P = 3.57 × 10-5) and returns a similar risk estimate. The effect of this SNP is modulated by histological subtype. On the log-additive scale, the odds ratio per allele is 1.04 (0.84-1.30) for adenocarcinomas, 1.52 (1.28-1.80) for squamous cell carcinomas and 1.31 (1.09-1.57) for other histologies (heterogeneity test: P = 9.1 × 10(-)(3)). Gene-based association analysis identifies three repair genes associated with LC (P < 0.01): UBE2N, structural maintenance of chromosomes 1L2 and POLB. Two additional genes (RAD52 and POLN) are borderline significant. Pathway-based association analysis identifies five repair pathways associated with LC (P < 0.01): chromatin structure, DNA polymerases, homologous recombination, genes involved in human diseases with sensitivity to DNA-damaging agents and Rad6 pathway and ubiquitination. This first international pooled analysis of a large dataset unravels the role of specific DNA repair pathways in LC and highlights the importance of accounting for gene and pathway effects when studying LC.     

Aspirin and NSAID use and lung cancer risk: a pooled analysis in the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO)

Purpose

To investigate the hypothesis that non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) lower lung cancer risk.

Methods

We analysed pooled individual-level data from seven case?Ccontrol and one cohort study in the International Lung Cancer Consortium (ILCCO). Relative risks for lung cancer associated with self-reported history of aspirin and other NSAID use were estimated within individual studies using logistic regression or proportional hazards models, adjusted for packyears of smoking, age, calendar period, ethnicity and education and were combined using random effects meta-analysis.

Results

A total of 4,309 lung cancer cases (mean age at diagnosis 65 years, 45% adenocarcinoma and 22% squamous-cell carcinoma) and 58,301 non-cases/controls were included. Amongst controls, 34% had used NSAIDs in the past (81% of them used aspirin). After adjustment for negative confounding by smoking, ever-NSAID use (affirmative answer to the study-specific question on NSAID use) was associated with a 26% reduction (95% confidence interval 8 to 41%) in lung cancer risk in men, but not in women (3% increase (?11% to 30%)). In men, the association was stronger in current and former smokers, and for squamous-cell carcinoma than for adenocarcinomas, but there was no trend with duration of use. No differences were found in the effects on lung cancer risk of aspirin and non-aspirin NSAIDs.

Conclusions

Evidence from ILCCO suggests that NSAID use in men confers a modest protection for lung cancer, especially amongst ever-smokers. Additional investigation is needed regarding the possible effects of age, duration, dose and type of NSAID and whether effect modification by smoking status or sex exists.     

Family history of cancer: pooled analysis in the International Head and Neck Cancer Epidemiology Consortium

Alcohol and tobacco consumption are well-recognized risk factors for head and neck cancer (HNC). Evidence suggests that genetic predisposition may also play a role. Only a few epidemiologic studies, however, have considered the relation between HNC risk and family history of HNC and other cancers. We pooled individual-level data across 12 case-control studies including 8,967 HNC cases and 13,627 controls. We obtained pooled odds ratios (OR) using fixed and random effect models and adjusting for potential confounding factors. All statistical tests were two-sided. A family history of HNC in first-degree relatives increased the risk of HNC (OR=1.7, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.2-2.3). The risk was higher when the affected relative was a sibling (OR=2.2, 95% CI 1.6-3.1) rather than a parent (OR=1.5, 95% CI 1.1-1.8) and for more distal HNC anatomic sites (hypopharynx and larynx). The risk was also higher, or limited to, in subjects exposed to tobacco. The OR rose to 7.2 (95% CI 5.5-9.5) among subjects with family history, who were alcohol and tobacco users. A weak but significant association (OR=1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2) emerged for family history of other tobacco-related neoplasms, particularly with laryngeal cancer (OR=1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.5). No association was observed for family history of nontobacco-related neoplasms and the risk of HNC (OR=1.0, 95% CI 0.9-1.1). Familial factors play a role in the etiology of HNC. In both subjects with and without family history of HNC, avoidance of tobacco and alcohol exposure may be the best way to avoid HNC.     

Cigarette smoking and pancreatic cancer risk: More to the story than just pack-years

PurposeCigarette smoking is an established risk factor for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. However, few studies have thoroughly investigated the effects of independent smoking dimensions (duration, intensity, cumulative dose and time since quitting) on risk estimates. We analysed data from the Queensland Pancreatic Cancer Study (QPCS), an Australian population-based case-control study, with the aim of determining which smoking component is primarily important to pancreatic cancer risk.MethodsOur study included 705 pancreatic cancer patients and 711 controls. Logistic regression and generalised additive logistic regression (for non-linear dose effects) were used to determine odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsCompared to never-smokers, current smokers had an increased risk of pancreatic cancer (OR = 3.4; 95% CI 2.4–5.0) after adjustment for age, sex, education, alcohol intake and birth country. Of the various smoking dimensions, smoking duration and time since quitting had a greater effect on OR estimates (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1.1–1.4 and OR 0.8; 95% CI 0.7–0.8) than smoking intensity (OR 1.1; 95% CI 0.9–1.2), once ever-smoking was accounted for.ConclusionsThis study confirms the association between cigarette smoking and pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and provides evidence to suggest that smoking pattern, in addition to dose effect, may affect disease risk.     

Cigarette smoking and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer (Australia)

Objectives: We studied the association between cigarette smoking and ovarian cancer in a population-based case–control study. Methods: A total of 794 women with histologically confirmed epithelial ovarian cancer who were aged 18–79 years and resident in one of three Australian states were interviewed, together with 855 controls aged 18–79 years selected at random from the electoral roll from the same states. Information was obtained about cigarette smoking and other factors including age, parity, oral contraceptive use, and reproductive factors. We estimated the relative risk of ovarian cancer associated with cigarette smoking, accounting for histologic type, using multivariable logistic regression to adjust for confounding factors. Results: Women who had ever smoked cigarettes were more likely to develop ovarian cancer than women who had never smoked (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.5; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.2–1.9). Risk was greater for ovarian cancers of borderline malignancy (OR = 2.4; 95% CI = 1.4–4.1) than for invasive tumors (OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.2–2.4) and the histologic subtype most strongly associated overall was the mucinous subtype among both current smokers (OR = 3.2; 95% CI = 1.8–5.7) and past smokers (OR = 2.3; 95% CI = 1.3–3.9). Conclusions: These data extend recent findings and suggest that cigarette smoking is a risk factor for ovarian cancer, especially mucinous and borderline mucinous types. From a public health viewpoint, this is one of the few reports of a potentially avoidable risk factor for ovarian cancer.     

Cigarette smoking and the association with serous ovarian cancer in African American women: African American Cancer Epidemiology Study (AACES)

Background

Smoking is a risk factor for mucinous ovarian cancer (OvCa) in Caucasians. Whether a similar association exists in African Americans (AA) is unknown.

Methods

We conducted a population-based case–control study of incident OvCa in AA women across 11 geographic locations in the US. A structured telephone interview asked about smoking, demographic, health, and lifestyle factors. Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (OR, 95% CI) were estimated from 613 cases and 752 controls using unconditional logistic regression in multivariable adjusted models.

Results

Associations were greater in magnitude for serous OvCa than for all OvCa combined. Compared to never smokers, increased risk for serous OvCa was observed for lifetime ever smokers (1.46, 1.11–1.92), former smokers who quit within 0–2 years of diagnosis (5.48, 3.04–9.86), and for total pack-years smoked among lifetime ever smokers (0–5 pack-years: 1.79, 1.23–2.59; >5–20 pack-years: 1.52, 1.05–2.18; >20 pack-years: 0.98, 0.61–1.56); however, we observed no dose–response relationship with increasing duration or consumption and no significant associations among current smokers. Smoking was not significantly associated with mucinous OvCa. Associations for all OvCa combined were consistently elevated among former smokers. The proportion of ever smokers who quit within 0–2 years was greater among cases (23%) than controls (7%).

Conclusions

Cigarette smoking may be associated with serous OvCa among AA, which differs from associations reported among Caucasians. Exposure misclassification or reverse causality may partially explain the absence of increased risk among current smokers and lack of dose–response associations. Better characterization of smoking patterns is needed in this understudied population.