Cannabis Smoking And Risk Of Lung Cancer - A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis

Background: Cannabis is the illicit psychoactive substance the most consumed in the world. Little is known about the association between the use of cannabis and the risk of lung cancer. Objective:The objective of this meta-analysis is to determine whether use of cannabis is a risk factor for lung cancer. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analyses of all languages articles using relevant computerised databases. MEDLINE (online PubMed), Web of knowledge, Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Directory of Open Access Journals were searched to September 2014 for cohorts and case-control studies that assessed the risk of lung cancer associated with cannabis smoking. The literature search was performed with a combination of medical subject headings terms, "cannabis" and "lung neoplasms". Data extraction: Two investigators independently analysed and extracted results from eligible studies. Our study's registration number on PROSPERO is CRD42014008872. Results: The search strategy identified 2476 citations. 13 studies were eligible for inclusion: 2 pooled analysis of 9 case-control studies, one case-control study and 3 cohorts. The cumulative analysis for all the studies under a fixed-effects model showed that cannabis smoking determined an increased risk of developing lung cancer in the future (relative risk 1.22, 95% confidence interval 0.999–1.5; p=0.051), with no evidence of heterogeneity across the studies (I2: 34%; p¼0.01). Conclusions: The use of cannabis with or without tobacco smoking is associated with an increased risk for lung cancer

Download Full-text

Association of dyslipidemia with the severity and mortality of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): a meta-analysis

Virology Journal ◽

10.1186/s12985-021-01604-1 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 18 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Yanli Liu ◽

Yilong Pan ◽

Yuyao Yin ◽

Wenhao Chen ◽

Xiaodong Li

Keyword(s):

Fixed Effects ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Risk Of Death ◽

Potential Association ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Language Restriction ◽

Newcastle Ottawa Scale

Abstract Background The numbers of confirmed cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and COVID-19 related deaths are still increasing, so it is very important to determine the risk factors of COVID-19. Dyslipidemia is a common complication in patients with COVID-19, but the association of dyslipidemia with the severity and mortality of COVID-19 is still unclear. The aim of this study is to analyze the potential association of dyslipidemia with the severity and mortality of COVID-19. Methods We searched the PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases for all relevant studies up to August 24, 2020. All the articles published were retrieved without language restriction. All analysis was performed using Stata 13.1 software and Mantel–Haenszel formula with fixed effects models was used to compare the differences between studies. The Newcastle Ottawa scale was used to assess the quality of the included studies. Results Twenty-eight studies involving 12,995 COVID-19 patients were included in the meta-analysis, which was consisted of 26 cohort studies and 2 case–control studies. Dyslipidemia was associated with the severity of COVID-19 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.11–1.44, P = 0.038, I2 = 39.8%). Further, patients with dyslipidemia had a 2.13-fold increased risk of death compared to patients without dyslipidemia (95% CI 1.84–2.47, P = 0.001, I2 = 66.4%). Conclusions The results proved that dyslipidemia is associated with increased severity and mortality of COVID-19. Therefore, we should monitor blood lipids and administer active treatments in COVID-19 patients with dyslipidemia to reduce the severity and mortality.

Download Full-text

Oral Contraceptive Use and Breast Cancer Risk Assessment: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Case-Control Studies, 2009–2020

Cancers ◽

10.3390/cancers13225654 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 13 (22) ◽

pp. 5654

Author(s):

Agnieszka Barańska ◽

Agata Błaszczuk ◽

Wiesław Kanadys ◽

Maria Malm ◽

Katarzyna Drop ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Oral Contraceptive ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Control ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Control Group ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Breast Cancer Risk Assessment

To perform a meta-analysis of case-control studies that addressed the association between oral contraceptive pills (OC) use and breast cancer (BrCa), PubMED (MEDLINE), Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify case-control studies of OC and BrCa published between 2009 and 2020. We used the DerSimonian–Laird method to compute pooled odds ratios (ORs) and confidence intervals (CIs), and the Mantel–Haenszel test to assess the association between OC use and cancer. Forty-two studies were identified that met the inclusion criteria and we included a total of 110,580 women (30,778 into the BrCa group and 79,802 into the control group, of which 15,722 and 38,334 were using OC, respectively). The conducted meta-analysis showed that the use of OC was associated with a significantly increased risk of BrCa in general, OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.31, p = 0.0358. Regarding other risk factors for BrCa, we found that increased risk was associated significantly with early menarche, nulliparous, non-breastfeeding, older age at first parity, postmenopause, obesity, smoking, and family history of BrCa. Despite our conclusion that birth control pills increase the cancer risk being supported by extensive previous studies and meta-analyzes, further confirmation is required.

Download Full-text

Hypertension and the risk of endometrial cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies

Scientific Reports ◽

10.1038/srep44808 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 24

Author(s):

Dagfinn Aune ◽

Abhijit Sen ◽

Lars J. Vatten

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Endometrial Cancer ◽

Cohort Studies ◽

Contraceptive Use ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Control ◽

Adjusted Relative Risk ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Relative Risks ◽

Increased Risk

Abstract A history of hypertension has been associated with increased risk of endometrial cancer in several studies, but the results have not been consistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies to clarify the association between hypertension and endometrial cancer risk. PubMed and Embase databases were searched up to 27th of February 2016. Prospective and case-control studies which reported adjusted relative risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals of endometrial cancer associated with a hypertension diagnosis were included. Summary relative risks were estimated using a random effects model. Nineteen case-control studies and 6 cohort studies were included. The summary RR was 1.61 (95% CI: 1.41–1.85, I2 = 86%) for all studies, 1.73 (95% CI: 1.45–2.06, I2 = 89%) for case-control studies and 1.32 (95% CI: 1.12–1.56, I2 = 47%) for cohort studies. The association between hypertension and endometrial cancer was weaker, but still significant, among studies with adjustment for smoking, BMI, oral contraceptive use, and parity, compared to studies without such adjustment. This meta-analysis suggest an increased risk of endometrial cancer among patients with hypertension, however, further studies with more comprehensive adjustments for confounders are warranted to clarify the association.

Download Full-text

Oral hormone pregnancy tests and the risks of congenital malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

F1000Research ◽

10.12688/f1000research.16758.2 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 7 ◽

pp. 1725 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Carl Heneghan ◽

Jeffrey K. Aronson ◽

Elizabeth Spencer ◽

Bennett Holman ◽

Kamal R. Mahtani ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cohort Studies ◽

Congenital Malformations ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Control ◽

Control Group ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Renal Anomalies ◽

Congenital Heart Malformations ◽

Increased Risk

Background: Oral hormone pregnancy tests (HPTs), such as Primodos, containing ethinylestradiol and high doses of norethisterone, were given to over a million women from 1958 to 1978, when Primodos was withdrawn from the market because of concerns about possible teratogenicity. We aimed to study the association between maternal exposure to oral HPTs and congenital malformations. Methods: We have performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies that included data from pregnant women and were exposed to oral HPTs within the estimated first three months of pregnancy, if compared with a relevant control group. We used random-effects meta-analysis and assessed the quality of each study using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for non-randomized studies. Results: We found 16 case control studies and 10 prospective cohort studies, together including 71 330 women, of whom 4,209 were exposed to HPTs. Exposure to oral HPTs was associated with a 40% increased risk of all congenital malformations: pooled odds ratio (OR) = 1.40 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.66; P<0.0001; I2 = 0%). Exposure to HPTs was associated with an increased risk of congenital heart malformations: pooled OR = 1.89 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.72; P = 0.0006; I2=0%); nervous system malformations OR = 2.98 (95% CI 1.32 to 6.76; P = 0.0109 I2 = 78%); gastrointestinal malformations, OR = 4.50 (95% CI 0.63 to 32.20; P = 0.13; I2 = 54%); musculoskeletal malformations, OR = 2.24 (95% CI 1.23 to 4.08; P= 0.009; I2 = 0%); the VACTERL syndrome (Vertebral defects, Anal atresia, Cardiovascular anomalies, Tracheoesophageal fistula, Esophageal atresia, Renal anomalies, and Limb defects), OR = 7.47 (95% CI 2.92 to 19.07; P < 0.0001; I2 = 0%). Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows that use of oral HPTs in pregnancy is associated with increased risks of congenital malformations.

Download Full-text

The Prevalence of Human Papillomavirus in Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review

International Journal of Gynecological Cancer ◽

10.1097/igc.0b013e318280f3e0 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 23 (3) ◽

pp. 437-441 ◽

Cited By ~ 19

Author(s):

Maria Inês Rosa ◽

Geraldo Doneda Silva ◽

Priscyla Waleska Targino de Azedo Simões ◽

Meriene Viquetti Souza ◽

Ana Paula Ronzani Panatto ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Human Papillomavirus ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Grey Literature ◽

Blot Hybridization ◽

Case Control ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Cross Sectional

ObjectiveWe performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis to estimate the prevalence of human papillomavirus (HPV) in ovarian cancer.MethodsA comprehensive search of the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, CANCERLIT, LILACS, Grey literature and EMBASE was performed for articles published from January 1990 to March 2012. The following MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms were searched: “ovarian tumor” or “ovarian cancers” and “HPV” or “human papillomavirus.” Included were case-control and cross-sectional studies, prospective or retrospective, that evaluated clinical ovarian cancer and provided a clear description of the use of in situ hybridization, Southern blot hybridization, and polymerase chain reaction. The statistical analysis was performed using REVMAN 5.0.ResultsIn total, 24 primary studies were included in this meta-analysis. Studies from 11 countries on 3 continents contained data on HPV and ovarian cancer, including 889 subjects. Overall, the HPV prevalence in patients with ovarian cancer was 17.5 (95% confidence interval [CI], 15.0%–20.0%). Human papillomavirus prevalence ranged from 4.0% (95% CI, 1.7%–6.3%) in Europe to 31.4% (95% CI, 26.9%–35.9%) in Asia. An aggregate of 4 case-control studies from Asia showed an odds ratio of 2.48 (95% CI, 0.64–9.57).ConclusionsWe found a high prevalence of HPV-positive DNA in ovarian cancer cases, but the role of HPV in ovarian cancer remains inconclusive. Further studies are needed to control case to answer this question.

Download Full-text

The association between ATM variants and risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMC Cancer ◽

10.1186/s12885-020-07749-6 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Masoumeh Moslemi ◽

Yousef Moradi ◽

Hojat Dehghanbanadaki ◽

Hamed Afkhami ◽

Mansoor Khaledi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Predictive Ability ◽

Case Control ◽

Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutated ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Predisposing Factor ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Atm Gene

Abstract Background Ataxia telangiectasia-mutated (ATM) gene contributes to repair damaged DNA and to regulate cell cycle; therefore, ATM variants seem to increase breast cancer risk; however, the results are controversial. So we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to clarify the pooled association between various ATM variants and the risk of breast cancer. Methods The relevant studies were searched through Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed and Cochrane. Stratified and subgroup analyses were performed to explore heterogeneity between studies and assess effects of study quality. The pooled estimates logarithm with standard error logarithm of odds ratio and relative risk with confidence interval were calculated. Results This study revealed that there is association between ATM variants and the risk of breast cancer; according to the seven adjusted case-control studies, OR of this association was estimated as 1.67 (95%CI: 0.73–3.82), according to nine unadjusted case-control studies, the crude OR was 2.27 (95% CI: 1.17–4.40) and according to two cohorts, the RR was estimated as 1.68 (95% CI: 1.17–2.40). Conclusions The ATM variants are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer that ATM V2424G mutation is detected as the most predisposing factor while ATM D1853V, L546V, and S707P variants have the least predictive ability.

Download Full-text

The Association Between Asthma and Risk of Myasthenia Gravis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

10.21203/rs.3.rs-224462/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Pitchaporn Yingchoncharoen ◽

Nipith Charoenngam ◽

Ben Ponvilawan ◽

Jerapas Thongpiya ◽

Thanat Chaikijurajai ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Myasthenia Gravis ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Pooled Analysis ◽

Case Control ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Eligibility Criteria ◽

Inverse Variance ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Independent Review

Abstract PurposeThis study aimed to investigate the association between asthma and risk of myasthenia gravis (MG) using the method of systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsPotentially eligible studies were identified from Medline and EMBASE databases from inception to … using search strategy that comprised of terms for “Asthma” and “Myasthenia Gravis”. Eligible cohort study must consist of one cohort of individuals with asthma and another cohort of individuals without asthma. Then, the study must report relative risk (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) of incident MG between the groups. Eligible case-control studies must include cases with MG and controls without MG. Then, the study must explore their history of asthma. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% CIs of the association between asthma status and MG must be reported. Point estimates with standard errors were retrieved from each study and were combined together using the generic inverse variance method.ResultsA total of 6,835 articles were identified. After two rounds of independent review by five investigators, two cohort studies and three case-control studies met the eligibility criteria and were included into the meta-analysis. Pooled analysis showed that asthma was significantly associated with risk of MG with the pooled risk ratio of 1.38 (95%CI, 1.02 – 1.86). Funnel plot was symmetric.ConclusionThe current study found a significant association between asthma and increased risk of MG.

Download Full-text

Oral hormone pregnancy tests and the risks of congenital malformations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

F1000Research ◽

10.12688/f1000research.16758.1 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 7 ◽

pp. 1725 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Carl Heneghan ◽

Jeffrey K. Aronson ◽

Elizabeth Spencer ◽

Bennett Holman ◽

Kamal R. Mahtani ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Cohort Studies ◽

Congenital Malformations ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Control ◽

Control Group ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Renal Anomalies ◽

Congenital Heart Malformations ◽

Increased Risk

Background: Oral hormone pregnancy tests (HPTs), such as Primodos, containing ethinylestradiol and high doses of norethisterone, were given to over a million women from 1958 to 1978, when Primodos was withdrawn from the market because of concerns about possible teratogenicity. We aimed to study the association between maternal exposure to oral HPTs and congenital malformations. Methods: We have performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control and cohort studies that included data from pregnant women and were exposed to oral HPTs within the estimated first three months of pregnancy, if compared with a relevant control group. We used random-effects meta-analysis and assessed the quality of each study using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale for non-randomized studies. Results: We found 16 case control studies and 10 prospective cohort studies, together including 71 330 women, of whom 4209 were exposed to HPTs. Exposure to oral HPTs was associated with a 40% increased risk of all congenital malformations: pooled odds ratio (OR) = 1.40 (95% CI 1.18 to 1.66; P<0.0001; I2 = 0%). Exposure to HPTs was associated with an increased risk of congenital heart malformations: pooled OR = 1.89 (95% CI 1.32 to 2.72; P = 0.0006; I2=0%); nervous system malformations OR = 2.98 (95% CI 1.32 to 6.76; P = 0.0109 I2 = 78%); gastrointestinal malformations, OR = 4.50 (95% CI 0.63 to 32.20; P = 0.13; I2 = 54%); musculoskeletal malformations, OR = 2.24 (95% CI 1.23 to 4.08; P= 0.009; I2 = 0%); the VACTERL syndrome (Vertebral defects, Anal atresia, Cardiovascular anomalies, Tracheoesophageal fistula, Esophageal atresia, Renal anomalies, and Limb defects), OR = 7.47 (95% CI 2.92 to 19.07; P < 0.0001; I2 = 0%). Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis shows that use of oral HPTs in pregnancy is associated with increased risks of congenital malformations.

Download Full-text

An increased risk of lung cancer in combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema patients with usual interstitial pneumonia compared with patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Therapeutic Advances in Respiratory Disease ◽

10.1177/17534666211017050 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 15 ◽

pp. 175346662110170

Author(s):

Qianqian Chen ◽

Ping Liu ◽

Hong Zhou ◽

Hui Kong ◽

Weiping Xie

Keyword(s):

Lung Cancer ◽

Systematic Review ◽

Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis ◽

Pulmonary Fibrosis ◽

Interstitial Pneumonia ◽

Fixed Effects ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Usual Interstitial Pneumonia ◽

Fixed Effects Model ◽

Increased Risk

Background: Lung cancer is an important complication of combined pulmonary fibrosis and emphysema (CPFE). Whether the risk of lung cancer is higher in CPFE patients with usual interstitial pneumonia (UIP) than those with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) alone, remains controversial. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the prevalence of lung cancer in CPFE patients with UIP compared with IPF patients. Methods: We searched the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases for studies that focused on the incidence of lung cancer in CPFE/UIP and IPF groups. We used a fixed-effects model to analyze the odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) according to data heterogeneity. The cumulative effects based on the publication year and sample size were assessed by cumulative meta-analysis. Results: A total of nine studies with 933 patients, including 374 CPFE patients with UIP, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Overall, CPFE patients with UIP have a higher risk of lung cancer than those with IPF alone (OR = 2.69; 95% CI: 1.78–4.05). There were increased risks of lung cancer in CPFE/UIP patients with the presence of emphysema (OR = 2.93; 95% CI: 1.79–4.79) or emphysema in ⩾10% of the lung volume (OR = 2.22; 95% CI: 1.06–4.68). Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis indicated a significantly higher prevalence of lung cancer in CPFE patients with UIP than in patients with IPF alone. The reviews of this paper are available via the supplemental material section.

Download Full-text

Dietary Inflammatory Index and Pancreatic Cancer Risk—A Systematic Review and Dose-response Meta-analysis

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s1368980021001579 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-24

Author(s):

Zhangyou Guo ◽

Yuan Hong ◽

Yao Cheng

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Pancreatic Cancer ◽

Dose Response ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Case Control ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Dietary Inflammatory Index ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Inflammatory Index ◽

Incident Cases

Abstract Objective: The meta-analysis was conducted to test the link between pancreatic cancer (PC) risk and dietary inflammatory index (DII®) score. Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Setting: We searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library up to November 22, 2020, to identify the relevant studies. Studies that reported the risk estimates and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the DII category and PC risk were included. The effect sizes were pooled using the random-effects model. Dose–response analysis was conducted where possible. Participants: Two prospective cohort studies of 634 705 participants (3 152 incident cases), and four case-control studies of 2 737 cases and 4 861 controls. Results: Overall, the pooled risk ratio (RR) indicated that individuals in the highest category compared with the lowest category had an increased PC risk (RR=1.45; 95% CI 1.11, 1.90; P=0.006). Meanwhile, significant heterogeneity was also revealed. The dose-response meta-analysis indicated that a 1-unit increase in the DII score was associated with the PC risk (RR=1.08; 95% CI 1.002, 1.166; P=0.045; I 2 =94.1%, P<0.001). Nonlinear result showed an increased risk of moving from fewer to more inflammatory borders with increasing DII score (Pnonlinearity = 0.003; I 2 =76.5%, P<0.001). Subgroup analyses found that significant positive association between PC risk and DII score appeared to be in case-control studies (RR=1.70; 95% CI 1.16, 2.50; P=0.007) and studies with ≤31 DII components (RR=1.76; 95% CI 1.14, 2.72; P=0.011). Conclusion: These findings suggested dietary habits with high inflammatory features (high DII score) might increase PC risk.

Download Full-text