Dataset Information

Oral Health and Risk of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers in a Large Prospective Study from a High-risk Region: Golestan Cohort Study.

ABSTRACT: Tooth loss and periodontal disease have been associated with several cancers, and poor oral health may be an important risk factor for upper gastrointestinal (UGI, i.e., esophageal and gastric) cancers. We assessed the relationship between oral health and UGI cancers using a large prospective study of over 50,000 adults living in Golestan Province, Iran, a high-incidence area for these cancers. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated for the association between three different measures of oral health [frequency of tooth brushing; number of missing teeth; and the sum of decayed, missing, and filled teeth (DMFT)] and UGI cancers. During a median follow-up duration of 13 years, there were 794 incident UGI cancers (396 esophageal and 398 gastric cancers). Daily tooth brushing was associated with a decreased risk of developing both esophageal (HR = 0.670; 95% CI: 0.486-0.924) and gastric (HR = 0.741; 95% CI: 0.544-1.01) cancers (combined UGI cancer HR = 0.697; 95% CI: 0.558-0.871) compared with never brushing. Tooth loss in excess of the loess smoothed, age- and sex-specific median number of teeth lost was significantly associated with esophageal (HR = 1.64; 95% CI: 1.08-2.47) and gastric cancers (HR = 1.58; 95% CI: 1.05-2.38). There were some adverse associations between DMFT and UGI cancers but most were not statistically significant. These results suggest increased risk of developing UGI cancers among individuals with poor oral health, and those who do not perform regular oral hygiene. PREVENTION RELEVANCE: Poor oral health is associated with the risk of upper gastrointestinal cancers, and oral hygiene practices may help prevent these cancers.

SUBMITTER: Yano Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8295188 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Three billion people burn nonclean fuels for household purposes. Limited evidence suggests a link between household fuel use and gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. OBJECTIVES:We investigated the relationship between indoor burning of biomass, kerosene, and natural gas with the subsequent risk of GI cancers. METHODS:During the period 2004-2008, a total of 50,045 Iranian individuals 40-75 years of age were recruited to this prospective population-based cohort. Upon enrollment, validated data were collected on demographics, lifestyle, and exposures, including detailed data on lifetime household use of different fuels and stoves. The participants were followed through August 2018 with <1% loss. RESULTS:During the follow-up, 962 participants developed GI cancers. In comparison with using predominantly gas in the recent 20-y period, using predominantly biomass was associated with higher risks of esophageal [hazard ratio (HR): 1.89; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02, 3.50], and gastric HR: 1.83; 95% CI: 1.01, 3.31) cancers, whereas using predominantly kerosene was associated with higher risk of esophageal cancer (HR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.10, 3.10). Lifetime duration of biomass burning for both cooking and house heating (exclusive biomass usage) using heating-stoves without chimney was associated with higher risk of GI cancers combined (10-y HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.07, 1.21), esophageal (10-y HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 1.08, 1.30), gastric (10-y HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.23), and colon (10-y HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.54) cancers. The risks of GI cancers combined, esophageal cancer, and gastric cancer were lower when biomass was burned using chimney-equipped heating-stoves (strata difference p-values=0.001, 0.003, and 0.094, respectively). Duration of exclusive kerosene burning using heating-stoves without chimney was associated with higher risk of GI cancers combined (10-y HR: 1.05; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.11), and esophageal cancer (10-y HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 1.04, 1.26). DISCUSSION:Household burning of biomass or kerosene, especially without a chimney, was associated with higher risk of some digestive cancers. Using chimney-equipped stoves and replacing these fuels with natural gas may be useful interventions to reduce the burden of GI cancers worldwide. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP5907.

Project description:Objective To compare the predictive accuracy and clinical utility of five risk scoring systems in the assessment of patients with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Design International multicentre prospective study.Setting Six large hospitals in Europe, North America, Asia, and Oceania.Participants 3012 consecutive patients presenting over 12 months with upper gastrointestinal bleeding.Main outcome measures Comparison of pre-endoscopy scores (admission Rockall, AIMS65, and Glasgow Blatchford) and post-endoscopy scores (full Rockall and PNED) for their ability to predict predefined clinical endpoints: a composite endpoint (transfusion, endoscopic treatment, interventional radiology, surgery, or 30 day mortality), endoscopic treatment, 30 day mortality, rebleeding, and length of hospital stay. Optimum score thresholds to identify low risk and high risk patients were determined.Results The Glasgow Blatchford score was best (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) 0.86) at predicting intervention or death compared with the full Rockall score (0.70), PNED score (0.69), admission Rockall score (0.66, and AIMS65 score (0.68) (all P<0.001). A Glasgow Blatchford score of ?1 was the optimum threshold to predict survival without intervention (sensitivity 98.6%, specificity 34.6%). The Glasgow Blatchford score was better at predicting endoscopic treatment (AUROC 0.75) than the AIMS65 (0.62) and admission Rockall scores (0.61) (both P<0.001). A Glasgow Blatchford score of ?7 was the optimum threshold to predict endoscopic treatment (sensitivity 80%, specificity 57%). The PNED (AUROC 0.77) and AIMS65 scores (0.77) were best at predicting mortality, with both superior to admission Rockall score (0.72) and Glasgow Blatchford score (0.64; P<0.001). Score thresholds of ?4 for PNED, ?2 for AIMS65, ?4 for admission Rockall, and ?5 for full Rockall were optimal at predicting death, with sensitivities of 65.8-78.6% and specificities of 65.0-65.3%. No score was helpful at predicting rebleeding or length of stay.Conclusions The Glasgow Blatchford score has high accuracy at predicting need for hospital based intervention or death. Scores of ?1 appear the optimum threshold for directing patients to outpatient management. AUROCs of scores for the other endpoints are less than 0.80, therefore their clinical utility for these outcomes seems to be limited.Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN16235737.

Dataset Information

Oral Health and Risk of Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers in a Large Prospective Study from a High-risk Region: Golestan Cohort Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets