Association between Gallstones or Cholecystectomy and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Li, F.; Murphy, G.; Mortell, G.; Cross, A.; Harewood, R.
Show abstract
BackgroundGallstones and cholecystectomy may be associated with upper gastrointestinal cancer risk but findings from individual studies are inconsistent. We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of available evidence. MethodsPubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were searched through September 2024 to identify case-control and cohort studies investigating gallstones or cholecystectomy and oesophageal or gastric cancer risk. Random effects models estimated pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for oesophageal and gastric cancer. Heterogeneity was evaluated using I2 and {tau}2 statistics. ResultsThis meta-analysis included 15 studies. There was no association between gallstones [RR (95%CI) = 1.05 (0.97-1.14)] or cholecystectomy [RR (95% CI) = 0.99 (0.87-1.13)] and oesophageal cancer; however, both were positively associated with gastric cancer [RR (95% CI) = 1.25 (1.08-1.44); 1.10 (1.05-1.16), respectively]. In subgroup analyses, cholecystectomy was positively associated with non-cardia [RR (95%CI) = 1.17 (1.04-1.33)] but not cardia gastric cancer [RR (95% CI) = 0.89 (0.78-1.02)]; there were no other statistically significant associations by subtype/subsite, however data were limited for some subgroups. ConclusionsGallstones and cholecystectomy were positively associated with gastric cancer, cholecystectomy was specifically associated with non-cardia gastric cancer. Endoscopic screening for gastric cancer may be considered among individuals with gallstones or cholecystectomy history. PROSPERO registration: CRD42024563020
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Risk of cancer in regular and low meat-eaters, fish-eaters, and vegetarians: a prospective analysis of UK Biobank participants 89%
- Neutrophil counts and cancer prognosis: an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies 88%
- Separating the effects of early and later life adiposity on colorectal cancer risk: a Mendelian randomization study 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Risk factors for gallstone disease onset in Japan: findings from the Shizuoka Study, a population-based cohort study 93%
- Oral aspirin for preventing colorectal adenoma recurrence: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials 91%
- Diagnostic value of circulating tumor DNA as an effective biomarker in cervical cancer: a meta-analysis 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Effect of a novel food rich in miraculin on the intestinal microbiome of malnourished patients with cancer and dysgeusia 89%
- Alcohol Consumption is Associated with Poor Prognosis in Obese Patients with COVID-19: a Mendelian Randomization Study using UK Biobank 89%
- Are probiotics and prebiotics safe for use during pregnancy and lactation? A systematic review and meta-analysis 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Occurrence and transmission potential of asymptomatic and presymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections: update of a living systematic review and meta-analysis 89%
- Factors associated with excess all-cause mortality in the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: a time-series analysis using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink 88%
- Genetically-proxied therapeutic inhibition of antihypertensive drug targets and risk of common cancers 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Polygenic risk scores for the prediction of common cancers in East Asians: A population-based prospective cohort study 90%
- Associations of proton pump inhibitors with susceptibility to influenza, pneumonia, and COVID-19: Evidence from a large population based cohort study 89%
- Healthcare in England was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic across the pancreatic cancer pathway: a cohort study using OpenSAFELY-TPP 88%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.