Dataset Information

Post-Diagnostic Beta Blocker Use and Prognosis of Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 11 Cohort Studies With 20,274 Patients.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Previous experimental studies have indicated that exposure to beta blocker provides protective effects against ovarian cancer (OC). However, findings from epidemiologic studies have still been controversial. Therefore, we carried out a meta-analysis to update and quantify the correlation between post-diagnostic beta blocker usage and OC prognosis.

Methods

The meta-analysis had been registered at PROSPEPO. The number of registration is CRD42020188806. A comprehensive search of available literatures in English prior to April 16, 2020, was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Web of Science databases. Random-effects models were used to calculate overall hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Publication bias assessments, and subgroup, sensitivity, and meta-regression analyses were also performed.

Results

Of the 637 initially identified articles, 11 retrospective cohort studies with 20,274 OC patients were included. The summary HRs did not reveal any statistically significant associations between post-diagnostic beta blocker use and OC prognosis characteristics, such as total mortality (HR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.92-1.27, I² = 76.5%, n = 9), cancer-specific mortality (HR = 1.22, 95% CI = 0.89-1.67, I² = 88.1%, n=3), and progression-free survival (HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.75-1.05, I² = 0, n = 4). No evidence of publication bias was observed in current analysis. In our subgroup analyses, the majority of results were consistent with the main findings. However, several positive correlations were detected in studies with ≥800 cases (HR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.05-1.37), no immortal time bias (HR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.10-1.49), and adjustment for comorbidity (HR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.05-1.37). In the meta-regression analysis, no evidence of heterogeneity was detected in the subgroups according to study characteristics and confounding factors.

Conclusions

Post-diagnostic beta blocker use has no statistical correlation with OC prognosis. More prospective cohort studies are necessary to further verify our results.

Systematic review registration

Identifier (CRD42020188806).

SUBMITTER: Wen ZY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8247638 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Ovarian cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer death among women in the USA. In this study, our objective was to determine whether modifiable exposures to common analgesics outside of standard treatment influence prognosis in patients with ovarian cancer. METHODS:The Nurses' Health Study (NHS) and Nurses' Health Study II (NHSII) are ongoing prospective studies of 121?700 and 116?429 US nurses who have completed biennial questionnaires since 1976 and 1989, respectively. We retrieved information from medical records, death certificates, or linkage to a state or Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry on ovarian cancer cases. Eligible participants had confirmed invasive, stage I-III epithelial ovarian cancer, and had data available on analgesic use. The primary objective was to determine whether self-reported regular use (?2 days per week) of aspirin, non-aspirin non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), or paracetamol before and after ovarian cancer diagnosis, was associated with ovarian cancer-specific survival. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to calculate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for these associations, adjusting for age and year of diagnosis, disease stage, and histology. FINDINGS:Between June 1, 1976, and May 31, 2012, for the NHS and between June 1, 1989, and May 31, 2013, for NHSII, 1789 participants of the NHS and NHSII studies were diagnosed with epithelial ovarian cancer and 1143 (64%) were eligible to be included in this study; 1031 (90%) of 1143 cases were included in the pre-diagnosis exposure analysis and 964 cases (84%) in the post-diagnosis exposure analysis. Compared with never-users, participants who reported recent (current use in the past 2 years) post-diagnosis use of aspirin (HR 0·68 [95% CI 0·52-0·89]) and non-aspirin NSAIDs (HR 0·67 [95% CI 0·51-0·87]) had an improved ovarian cancer-specific survival. Any type of analgesic use pre-diagnosis, and post-diagnosis use of paracetamol, were not positively associated with ovarian cancer-specific survival. In analyses of change in analgesic use from pre-diagnosis to post-diagnosis, those participants who became recent users of aspirin (HR 0·44 [95% CI 0·26-0·74]) or became recent users of non-aspirin NSAIDs (HR 0·46 [95% CI 0·29-0·73]) post-diagnosis had a lower risk of ovarian cancer-specific death than never-users. INTERPRETATION:Recent use of aspirin or non-aspirin NSAIDs, defined as current use in the past 2 years, after diagnosis appears to improve ovarian cancer-specific survival. If these results are confirmed in further studies, further research should explore potential synergistic effects of anti-inflammatory medications used in combination with standard ovarian cancer therapies to improve the prognosis for patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer. FUNDING:National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, The Marsha Rivkin Center for Ovarian Cancer Research.

Project description:BackgroundMany antipsychotics elevate prolactin, a hormone implicated in breast cancer aetiology however no studies have investigated antipsychotic use in patients with breast cancer. This study investigated if antipsychotic use is associated with an increased risk of cancer-specific mortality among breast cancer patients.MethodsA cohort of 23,695 women newly diagnosed with a primary breast cancer between 1st January 1998 and 31st December 2012 was identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink linked to English cancer-registries and followed for until 30th September 2015. Time-dependent Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of breast cancer-specific mortality comparing use of antipsychotics with non-use, overall, and by prolactin elevating activitiy. Analyses were repeated restricting to patients with a history of severe mental illness to control for potential confounding by indication.ResultsIn total 848 patients were prescribed an antipsychotic and of which 162 died due to their breast cancer. Compared with non-use, antipsychotic use was associated with an increased risk of breast-cancer specific mortality (HR 2.25, 95%CI 1.90-2.67), but this did not follow a dose response relation. Restricting the cohort to patients with severe mental illness attenuated the association between antipsychotic use and breast cancer-specific mortality (HR 1.11, 95%CI 0.58-2.14).ConclusionsIn this population-based cohort of breast cancer patients, while the use of antipsychotics was associated with increased breast cancer-specific mortality, there was a lack of a dose response, and importantly null associations were observed in patients with severe mental illness, suggesting the observed association is likely a result of confounding by indication. This study provides an exemplar of confounding by indication, highlighting the importance of consideration of this important bias in studies of drug effects in cancer patients.

Project description:Background: The aim of this study was to comprehensively review the literature and synthesize the evidence concerning the relationship between prior calcium channel blocker (CCB) use and mortality in patients with sepsis. Methods: The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), Cochrane CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases were searched from their inception to April 9, 2020. Cohort studies related to prior calcium channel blocker use in patients with sepsis were analyzed. Pairs of reviewers independently screened the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcome of 90-days mortality or secondary outcome of short-term mortality, including 30-days, Intensive Care Unit (ICU), and in-hospital mortality, were analyzed. Heterogeneity among studies was assessed using the I 2 statistic and was considered moderate if I 2 was 50-75% and high if I 2 was ≥75%. Random-effects models were used to calculate the pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The quality of the studies was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of the results. Results: In total, 639 potentially relevant studies were identified, and the full texts of 25 articles were reviewed. Ultimately, five cohort studies involving 280,982 patients were confirmed to have a low risk of bias and were included. Prior CCB use was associated with a significantly lower 90-days mortality in sepsis patients [OR, 0.90 (0.85-0.95); I 2 = 31.9%]. Moreover, prior CCB use was associated with a significantly reduced short-term mortality rate in septic shock patients [OR, 0.61 (0.38-0.97); I 2 = 62.4%] but not in sepsis patients [OR, 0.83 (0.66-1.04); I 2 = 95.4%]. Conclusion: This meta-analysis suggests that prior CCB use is significantly associated with improved 90-days mortality in sepsis patients and short-term mortality in septic shock patients. This study provides preliminary evidence of an association between prior CCB use and mortality in sepsis patients.