Category Archives: Gastroenterology

One for the PPI team

Posted on by

While this blog in previous posts has pointed out some shortcomings of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), at the same time this class of medications remains a crucial part of pediatric gastroenterology practice.  In most patients, the benefits of these medications far outweigh the potential risks.

One of the risks has been a low rate of increased infections due to lowering gastric acid which provides some protection against enteric infections.  More information about PPIs show that these medications are not likely to increase the risk of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) (Am J Gastroenterol 2012; 107: 730-35 –thanks to Ben Gold for showing me this article).

In this retrospective study from 2004-2010, 1191 patients were included with 566 receiving PPI therapy.  Mean age: 63 years for PPI users and 59 years for nonusers. Glucose breath hydrogen testing (GBHT) for bacterial overgrowth did not differ significantly between PPI users and nonusers.  The authors acknowledge that there have been conflicting reports previously between the use of PPIs and the development of SIBO (see Table 5 of article); interestingly, SIBO with PPIs has occurred predominantly in studies from Europe.  The authors note that while achlorhydria leads to SIBO, the intermittent surges of acid production with PPIs should be sufficient to prevent SIBO.

Additional references/previous blog posts:

  • Proton pump inhibitors–infection risk with cirrhosis
  • The Medical Pendulum and Gastroesophageal Reflux
  • -Gastroenterol Hepatol 2011; 7: 10-2.  Risk of infections with PPIs.
  • -Gut 2007; 56: 802-8.  SIBO with IBS.
  • -NEJM 2010; 363: 2114. large Denmark study. 5082 fetuses with PPI exposure (out of 840,968 live births. Risk of birth defects NOT increased with exposure during 1st trimester. Possible slight increase with preconception use except with omeprazole.
  • -Gastroenterol 2010; 139: 1115. Review of safety of PPIs.
  • -Gastroenterol 2010; 139: 93. n=167,000. PPIs associated with hip fracture risk, OR 1.3, in patients with other risk factors.
  • -Gastroenterol 2010; 138: 896-904. 5 yrs of PPI -no increase risk in hip/spine fx.
  • -Arch Intern Med 2010; 170: 765-71, 747 (ed). PPI not related to hip fx (n=161,806) women 50-79. INCREASE risk of spine fx, hazard risk 1.47
  • -Arch Intern Med 2010; 170: 772-8. PPIs increase risk of CDT (hazard ratio 1.42 –42% increase in risk), n=1166.
  • -Arch Intern Med 2010; 170: 784-90. n=101,796.  Risk of nosocomial infection: OR 1.74 for daily PPI, OR 2.36 if BID Rx; thus ~70% increase risk of nosocomial infection.

Aspirin prophylaxis for colorectal cancer?

Posted on by

A recent article in The Lancet has provided additional information about the use of aspirin for cancer prevention, especially colorectal cancer (Rothwell PM et al. Lancet 2012; published online March 21. DOI: 10: 1016/S0140-6736 (11)61720-0).  In the commentary on this article (DOI: 10: 1016/S0140-6736 (11)61654-1), the potential benefits of aspirin are placed into context and previous studies are reviewed.  In short, the data from a number of studies suggest that aspirin lowers the risk of cancer.

In Rothwell’s study, which pooled data from 51 randomized trials, aspirin at any dose reduced the risk of non-vascular death by 12% and cancer death by 15%.   Benefit was seen within 3 years for high-dose (>300 mg/day) and after 5 years for low doses (<300 mg).  The cumulative numbers of patients in the reviewed studies was approximately 40,000 in each arm.  These studies were divided and examined under separate categories to assess primary prevention for vascular events and to assess effects on cancer deaths.

Yet, these encouraging results though have not been seen in several large randomized trials; the editorial notes that “the Women’s Health Study (WHS) of 39,876 women treated with alternated day 100 mg aspirin over 10 years and the Physicians’ Health Study (PHS) of 22,071 men treated with alternate-day 325 mg aspirin for 5 years.  After 10-12 years of folllow-up, aspirin was not associated with reduced risk of colorectal cancer.”  In addition, as noted in previous post, ( Who needs aspirin?/Arch Intern Med 2012; 119: 112-8) a large study with over 100,000 patients also did not show reduction in mortality from vascular or non-vascular events.

Whether alternate-day dosing of aspirin (in WHS and PHS studies) undermines its efficacy in preventing cancer is not clear.  Until more data are available, aspirin for chemoprevention is best-suited for those with increased cancer risk (eg. history of colorectal cancer & hereditary cancer syndrome) and low risk of GI bleeding.  Rates of bleeding due to aspirin are about 4% per year and for serious bleeding about 2% per year. In addition, other adverse effects, including macular degeneration, have been reported with aspirin use (Ophthalmology 2012; 119: 112-8).

Additional references:

  • Link to pdf copy of cited article:http://extremelongevity.net/wp-content/uploads/asa-ca.pdf
  • -Lancet 2011; 377: 31-41. Aspirin effect on cancer mortality -decreased by 30-40% (esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, colorectal)
  • -Lancet 2010; 376: 1741 – 1750. Long-term effect of aspirin on colorectal cancer incidence and mortality: 20-year follow-up of five randomised trials. Lowers risk of colon Ca.
  • -JAMA 2009; 302: 649. Aspirin use likely increases survival after dx of colon cancer.
  • -Gastro 2010;138: 2012. Commentary on aspirin for decreasing risk after diagnosis of colon cancer.
  • -NEJM 2007; 356: 2131, 2195. Aspirin can decrease high-expressing COX-2 colon adenoca; not recommended as routine prophylaxis at this time

Who needs aspirin?

Posted on by

Despite a lot of good press for aspirin with regards to prevention of cardiovascular events and cancer prevention, determining who should take aspirin is quite tricky.  This blog entry will discuss the vascular rationale and a subsequent post will tackle the potential of aspirin for colorectal cancer prevention.

At this time, the cardiovascular disease (CVD) rationale includes preventing myocardial infarction [MI] and stroke.  These are the main determinants of risk/benefit for taking aspirin.  In 2009, guidelines from US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) for taking aspirin were published (Ann Intern Med 2009; 150: 396-404).  The following link can be used to access this article:

http://www.uspreventiveservicestaskforce.org/uspstf09/aspirincvd/aspcvdrs.pdf

The recommendations include the following:

Men <45:  Not encourage aspirin for MI prevention

Women <55: Not encourage aspirin for stroke prevention

Men 45-79:  Encourage aspirin when CVD benefit.  Benefit likely if:

  • 45-59 years, 10 -year CVD risk ≥4%
  • 60-69 years, 10-year CVD risk ≥9%
  • 70-79 years, 10-year CVD risk ≥12%
To calculate 10-year CVD risk: http://www.mcw.edu/calculators.htm
Risk factors: age, high blood pressure, diabetes, smoking, history of CVD, total cholesterol level, and HDL cholesterol level

Women 55-79:  Encourage aspirin when stroke benefit.  Benefit likely if:

  • 55-59 years, 10 -year stroke risk ≥3%
  • 60-69 years, 10 -year stroke risk ≥8%
  • 70-59 years, 10 -year stroke risk ≥11%

To calculate 10 -year stroke risk: http://my.clevelandclinic.org/p2/stroke-risk-calculator.aspx

Risk factors: age, high blood pressure, diabetes, smoking, history of CVD, atrial fibrillation, and left ventricular hypertrophy

In addition, it is noted that aspirin is NOT recommended when other NSAIDs are being administered or if history of GI ulcers/risk of serious GI bleeding.

While these recommendations are a useful starting point and the risk calculators are fascinating, the absolute benefit of aspirin remains unclear.  A recent article on this subject indicates that aspirin may not improve mortality (Arch Intern Med. 2012;172(3):209-216. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2011.628).  This article reviewed nine large randomized placebo-controlled studies, each with at least 1000 participants.  In total, more than 100,000 patients were described in these studies.  While CVD events were reduced by 10%, there was no reduction in mortality for cardiovascular disease (OR 0.99) or for cancer (OR 0.93) among aspirin takers over a mean of 6 years.  Most of the reduction in CVD events were due to a lower rate of non-fatal MI (OR 0.80).  In addition, there was an increase in significant GI bleeding among patients taking aspirin (OR 1.31)

Due to these results, the authors conclude that routine use as primary prevention is not warranted; “treatment decisions need to be considered on a case-by-case basis.”

Additional reference:

  • –Arch Intern Med 2012;172:217-218.  Aspirin Therapy in Primary Prevention: Comment on “Effect of Aspirin on Vascular and Nonvascular Outcomes”

Will NOTES come to pediatrics?

Posted on by

Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) has been receiving increasing attention and is being considered as a potential alternative to laparascopic surgery; but it will be a long time before NOTES comes to pediatrics.  Initial studies for several indications have been published in the last few years and this experience has recently been reviewed (Gastroenterology 2012; 142: 704-10).

Potential operations include the following:

  • Cholecystectomy.  This has been accomplished transgastric and transvaginally.  One multicenter study published experience with 362 transgastric cases and another with 551 transvaginal cases.
  • Thyroidectomy via a translingual approach.
  • Esophageal myotomy via a transesophageal approach.
  • Appendectomy via a transvaginal approach.
  • Rectal cancer resection via a transrectal approach.

Thus far, complications have been low & no deaths; only infrequently has a laparascopic or open procedure been needed to salvage the operation.  The main limitation to further use of NOTES has been adequate instrumentation and a critical mass of investigators to explore this technique.  As expertise develops in this area, a much larger number of procedures will be undertaken.  In many ways, NOTES is akin to laparascopy in its early days.  Potential advantages of decreased pain and faster recovery are the motivation to continue to work on NOTES.

Preventing Cancer in patients with Barrett’s Esophagus

Posted on by

Though Barrett’s esophagus is rare in pediatric gastroenterology, concerns about esophageal cancer are fairly frequent.  In addition, some conditions that increase the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma start in childhood.

One way to lessen the risk of Barrett’s esophagus in adults is through the use of medications (Gastroenterology 2012; 142: 442-52).  This study was a pooled analysis of six population-based trials with a total of 1226 esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) patients and 1140 esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinoma (EGJA) patients.  NSAIDs (aspirin and nonaspirin) lowered the risk of both EAC and EGJA, with OR of 0.68 and 0.83 respectively.

Although this study suggests a possible role for NSAIDs in preventing cancer in patients with Barrett’s esophagus, the risks and benefits for this intervention need to be individualized.

Related previous blog post: More bad news for smokers

Additional references:

  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 2000. Lower risk of Barrett’s in pts taking NSAIDs & statins. n=570.
  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 1179. Overall, patients with BE and LGD have a low annual incidence of EAC, similar to nondysplastic BE. There are no risk factors for progression and there is significant interobserver variation in diagnosis, even among expert pathologists.
  • -NEJM 2011; 365: 1375. Large Danish study, n=11028. Lower incidence of Barrett’s than previous estimates. Relative risk of 11.3 compared to general population for adenoca of Esophagus with absolute annual risk of 0.12%. Barrett’s patients have the same life expectancy as general population (ed. pg 1437). Detecting cancer only ~1 in 1460 scopes with screening whereas Barrett’s detected in 10% of pts.
  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 417, 460. Durable effects of ablation, n=127..
  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 1084. AGA statement on Barrett’s . Recs screening only in those with multiple risk factors (age 50, male, chronic GERD, white, incr BMI)
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2010; 8: 565. Guidelines suggest that screening for Barrett’s is not justified w/o alarm symptoms (dysphagia, odynophagia, wt loss, anemia, hematemesis)
  • -Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 2260. n=11,823. Decrease risk of esophageal adenoCa in patients taking NSAIDs & statins.
  • -Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 854. Nice review.
  • -Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 5. Survival equivalent to general population according to Mayo study, n=366. In Barrett’s patients, leading cause of death was cardiovascular (28%). Esophageal cancer resulted in 7% of deaths. Study presented at ACG Oct 26, 2009.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hepatology 2009; 7: 1266. no benefit from surgery for Barrett’s & unclear if chemoprevention works.
  • -Gastroenterology 2009; 137: 763. Suggests surveillance with Barrett’s is not beneficial.
  • -NEJM 2009; 360: 2277, 2353.. Radiofrequency ablation can be effective.
  • -Gut 2008; 57: 1200-06. Utility of endoscopic Rx.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2008; 6: 1206; editorials: 1180, 1181, 1183.. n=2107 with Barrett’s. 79 w surgery and 80 w endoscopic Rx.
  • -Gastro & Hep 2006; 2: 468. 2-8% of pts in general population have Barrett’s. >90% of ptsc Barretts will never develop cancer. Screening has not been proven to be effective in lowering rate of death from cancer. ~40% of US population has heartburn; only 8000-9000/yr develop esoph adenoCa. Also, the presence of Barrett esophagus does not decrease life expectancy.
  • -Gastroenterology 2005; 129: 1825-31. 1.6% incidence of BE in adult Swedish population. Alcohol, smoking increase risk.

Disruption of KLF4 is the real villain for gastric cancer

Posted on by

The only reason I’m posting this article is the word “Villin” in the title of the article (Gastroenterology 2012; 142: 531-42); I wondered what this was.  In this study, the authors show that “disruption of KLF4 in villin-positive gastric progenitor cells promotes the formation and progression of tumors in the antrum of mice.”  For the uninitiated,  an editorial on pages 424-27 of the same issue explains the entire article and the significance of the findings.

Kruppel-like factor 4 (KLF4) is a protein in multiple tissues that is important in cell differentiation, inflammation, and carcinogenesis.  Villin is an actin-bundling protein found in the apical brush border of absorptive tissue.  Villin-expressing gastric progenitor cells are typically quiescent but undergo division during inflammatory insults.

This is important in understanding gastric cancer because for a long time it was unclear why cancer would develop in the stomach where there is frequent turnover of the mucosa.  It is likely that more quiescent cells live long enough to accumulate cancer-promoting mutations/changes.  This study adds support to this hypothesis, at least in mice.

Gluten sensitivity without celiac disease

Posted on by

Gluten free is big business.  In a range of conditions, eliminating gluten has been advocated to improve symptoms.  The most frequent problem in which a gluten-free diet (GFD) may be beneficial is irritable bowel syndrome (IBS).  A selected summary in Gastroenterology discusses this topic (Gastroenterology 2012; 142: 664-73).

This review highlights an article that showed improvement in a double-blind randomized trial (Am J Gastroenterol 2011; 106: 508-14) & then reviews the topic more broadly.  The study is the first randomized controlled trial that suggests that nonceliac IBS patients may improve with a GFD.  The study looked at 34 patients with IBS who had improved with a GFD & had no evidence of celiac disease (either negative HLA-DQ2/DQ8 or duodenal biopsy).  Then 19 patients had 16g of gluten per day reintroduced; control patients were offered equivalent food that was gluten-free.  The gluten products in the study were free of fermentable oligo-, di-, monosaccharides and polyols to avoid confounders (What to make of FODMAPs).  The patients who continued a GFD had less reported pain, bloating and tiredness.  The GFD group reported good control of symptoms the previous week in 68% vs. 40% in the study group.

The commentary notes that ‘gluten sensitivity’ is big business, accounting for 1.3 billion in 2011 expenditures.  Companies like General Mills, Betty Crocker, PF Chang’s, and Subway are offering gluten-free choices.  Since immune activation and low-grade inflammation may be important for IBS, it is possible that some foods trigger these processes.  At the same time, individuals with reported gluten sensitivity have not been shown to have increased intestinal permeability; this is in contrast to celiac disease (BMC Med 2011; 9; 23).

There may be more patients with IBS who will benefit from a GFD due to gluten sensitivity than patients with celiac disease.

Additional references:

  • -Nutr Clin Pract. 2011;26:294-299.  A gluten-free diet (GFD) is commonly recognized as the treatment for celiac disease. It also has been investigated as a treatment option for other medical conditions, including dermatitis herpetiformis, irritable bowel syndrome, neurologic disorders, rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes mellitus, and HIV-associated enteropathy. The strength of the evidence for the use of a GFD in these nonceliac diseases varies.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2007; 5: 844. GFD in IBS pts (w/o celiac)
  • -Am J Gastro 2009; 104: 1587. Gluten sensitivity in IBS (w celiac)
  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 1187. Prevalence of celiac similar in IBS as general population though higher number (7%) with celiac antibodies (esp gliadin).
  • -Am J Gastro 2008; 103: S472 (abstract P687) Serology for Celiac in IBS patients same as in controls. n=566. n=555 controls.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2007; 5: 844. d-IBS patients may respond to gluten-free diet, especially if positive HLA-DQ2 expression or positive celiac serology.
  • -Lancet 2001; 358: 1504-08. n=300 uninvestigated pts w IBS criteria & 300 controls. 66 w positive serology; 14 w biopsy-proven celiac dz, 43 w normal biopsies. Odds ratio of 7 to have celiac compared to control group (2 w biopsy-proven disease).

HEROES trial

Posted on by

HEROES is definitely a catchy acronym (Arch Intern Med 2011; 171: 1929-36); HEROES is short for Helicobacter eradication relief of dyspeptic symptoms.

In pediatric practice, when Helicobacter pylori infection is identified, efforts are made to eradicate it.  However, studies have not been conclusive about whether this is beneficial for individuals with ‘functional dyspepsia.’  A 2006 Cochrane review of 21 trials found only 6 were positive for eradication.  Previous trials had not focused on primary care patients who may be more prone to respond.  As such, the investigators randomly assigned 404 patients (adults with average age of 46 years) into a group (n=201) treated with antibiotics and a control group (n=203); this was a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial at a single center.  All eligible patients had to meet the Rome III criteria for functional dyspepsia and have H pylori infection.  Individuals with heartburn and irritable bowel were excluded. The antibiotic group received omeprazole, amoxicillin, and clarithromycin whereas the control group received omeprazole and placebo –both groups received treatment for 10 days.

In the antibiotic group, 49% achieved at least a 50% reduction in symptoms at 12 months; the control group had a 36.5% response.  Overall, 78.1% of the antibiotic cohort improved compared with 67.5% in the control cohort.

Although the findings of the study indicate improvement with a course of antibiotics, what to do with these results is not clear.  Worldwide, at least 50% of the population is infected by H pylori.  In addition, dyspeptic symptoms afflict up to 40% of the adult population in Western countries.  Due to the enormity of these problems, translating the results of this study into practical treatment strategies is difficult.

Additional references:

  • -JPGN 2011; 52: 387. Impact of Rome III criteria on yield. Still 2.8% w/o alarm symptoms that had significant endoscopic findings.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2008; 6: 746. Antidepressant venlafaxine not effective in functional dyspepsia in double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study. n=160.
  • -Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; (2): CD002096. Rx of H pylori in functional dyspepsia.
  • -Gastroenterology 2007; 133: 799. Natural hx of functional disorders: 20% persist w same Sx, 40% develop other Sx, 40% get better. Large study from Olmstead county (n=1365)
  • -Gastroenterology 2007; 132: 1684.  Changes in cerebral blood flow during gastric balloon distention in dyspepsia.
  • -Gastroenterology 2006; 130: 1466-79. Functional gastroduodenal d/o. Acid suppression is 1st line Rx.
  • -Gastroenterology 2005; 129:1753-55, 1756-80, 1711. Mgt & guidelines for dyspepsia. In pts < 55 w/o alarm sx, test for H pylori and rx c PPI. In pts who don’t respond, consider EGD. Other Rx unclear: prokinetics, anticholinergics, antidepressants.
  • -Gastroenterology 2004; 127; 1239. Review of functional dyspepsia. Rx initial c acid-blocker/prokinetic reasonable, if not helpful, consider tricyclic, or clonidine. Eliminate H pylori. Sumatriptan may help
  • -J Pediatr 2005; 146: 448, 500.  Dyspepsia in children often associated with delayed GE and reduced gastric volumes
  • -Gastroenterology 2003; 125: 1219-26. Algorithm suggested:1. chech H pylori 2. Rx c PPI/H2RA.  3. If persists, EGD.  If EGD neg, consider elavil
  • -Clinical Gastro & Hepatology 2003; 1: 356. Increased Mast cells noted.
  • -Gastroenterology 2002; 123: 1778, 2132. Use of hypnosis for NUD.
  • -Ann Intern Med 2001; 134: 361-369. Meta-analysis of H pylori & NUD. Non-significant/minor improvement c eradication.

TNF antagonists and UC

Posted on by

In my fellowship (15 years ago), the use of thiopurines (eg. azathioprine, 6-mercaptopurine) for ulcerative colitis was debated.  Many physicians urged colectomy rather than using these drugs which could have long-term consequences.  At the time, the risk of thiopurines was less well-understood.  Over time, the use of these agents has become common when mesalamine products were ineffective.  The same issue comes up with TNF antagonists versus colectomy.

A recent study provides more information on the effectiveness of adalimumab for patients with moderate-to-severe UC but does not settle this debate (Gastroenterology 2012; 142: 257-65).  In this study, termed ‘ULTRA-2’ (Ulcerative colitis long-term remission and maintenance with adalimumab 2), the  efficacy of adalimumab for induction & maintenance of remission was studied in 494 patients.  This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study; average age was 40 years.

Clinical remission in the adalimumab group were 16.5% at 8 weeks (9.3% placebo).  At 52 weeks, 17.3% in the adalimumab group were in remission (8.5% placebo).  Among patients naive to anti-TNF agents, the response rate was 21.3% at week 8 & 22% at week 52.  Safety overall was similar in both groups; however, in the adalimumab group one patient developed gastric cancer and one developed squamous cell carcinoma.

The authors conclude that adalimumab is safe and more effective than placebo in inducing and maintaining remission among patients with moderate-to-severe UC.

A second study, also published this past month, looks at the use of infliximab for maintenance therapy for UC (Inflamm Bowel Dis 2012; 18: 201-11).  Patients who had achieved benefit from ACT-1 and ACT-2 studies were followed for three years.  Dosage of infliximab could be adjusted.  A total of 229 patients entered the study.  During the study, 70 patients (30.6%) discontinued infliximab due to adverse effects (10.5%), lack of efficacy (4.8%) or other reasons (15.2%); the majority were able to continue infliximab.  The authors indicate that no new safety issues were identified. Yet, there were two deaths among the infliximab group including a 19 year-old nonsmoker who developed lung cancer and a lethal case of histoplasmosis.

Because the improvement compared to placebo is modest with both of these agents, the question about whether to use these medications or proceed to surgery in UC patients is unanswered.

Additional references:

  • -Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Oct 15;28(8):966-72. Epub 2008 Jul 24.  Long-term outcome of adalimumab therapy for ulcerative colitis with intolerance or lost response to infliximab: a single-centre experience.
  • -Am J Gastroenterol (Oussalah A et al) 2010; 105: 2617-25. Multicenter study of IFX for UC
  • -Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 2282. Severe pediatric UC. 25/33 responded to IFX. colectomy rate 19% at 1 year.
  • -Gastroenterology 2009; 137: 1204 (ed), 1250. lower colectomy rates at 54wks in IFX vs placebo (+concomitant meds): 10% vs. 17%.
  • -Clin Gastro & Hep 2008; 6: 1112. Do NOT use CYA post infliximab and vice versa. n=19. 1 death due to sepsis. Remission rates occur in ~1/3rd but are of short duration.
  • -NEJM 2005; 2462. 69% clinical response @ 8 weeks (vs. 37% placebo) & 45% at week 54 (vs. 20% placebo).
  • -JPGN 2004; 38: 298. 82% short-term response, 63% sustained response; n=16.

More bad news for smokers

Posted on by

Add two more cancer risks for tobacco smoke (Gastroenterology 2012: 142: 233-40, 242-47).  There is now evidence linking tobacco smoke to 18 different cancers and tobacco smoke is probably the most preventable cause of death in the world.

In the first study, the investigators examined 3167 patients with Barrett’s esophagus.  This retrospective study followed patients for 7.5 years.  Patients who were current smokers (any form of tobacco) had double the risk of developing high-grade dysplasia or cancer compared to those who had never smoked.  Former cigarette smokers had a hazard ratio of 1.53.

In the second study, 386 patients with Lynch syndrome were analyzed during a 10 month period.  The hazard ratio for developing colorectal adenomas was 6.13 for current smokers and 3.03 for former smokers compared with patients who never smoked.  In addition, the authors identified a trend for developing adenomas based on pack-years.

Two more reasons to quit smoking.  On a side note, my grandmother said quitting smoking was the easiest thing that she ever did.  So easy, she did it a thousand times.

Additional references:

  • -Gastroenterolgy 2005; 129: 1825-31.  1.6% incidence of BE in adult Swedish population. Alcohol & smoking increase risk.
  • -NEJM 2011; 365: 1222. Treating smokers -useful review.
  • -NEJM 2011; 365: 1193. Cytisine -inexpensive- helps with smoking cessation (8.4% success vs 2.4%in placebo)
  • -NEJM 2008 358; 2249. Smoking and role of social networks.
  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 2000. Lower risk of Barrett’s in pts taking NSAIDs & statins. n=570.
  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 141: 1179. Lower risk of Barrett’s in pts with low-grade dysplasia than previously noted -similar to non-dysplastic Barrett’s.
  • -NEJM 2011; 365: 1375. Large Danish study, n=11028. Lower incidence of Barrett’s than previous estimates. Relative risk of 11.3 compared to general population for adenoca of Esophagus with absolute annual risk of 0.12%. Barrett’s patients have the same life expectancy as general population (ed. pg 1437). Detecting cancer only ~1 in 1460 scopes with screening whereas Barrett’s detected in 10% of pts.
  • -Gastroenterology 2011; 140: 1084. AGA statement on Barrett’s . Recs screening only in those with multiple risk factors (age 50, male, chronic GERD, white, incr BMI)
  • -NEJM 2005; 352: 1851. Cases of Lynch can be missed when following screening guidelines.
  • -Gastroenterology 2010; 138: 207-2177 (entire issue) Colon cancer, Lynch syndrome
  • -Gastroenterology 2008; 135: 380.  Review of colon cancer screening and prevention -2008 up-to-date- literature review
  • -Gastroenterology 1967; 53: 517-27.  Seminal article.  Lynch HT showed gene-related cancer in family cancer syndrome -different than polyposis syndromes.