96 resultados para All-cause mortality
Resumo:
Background: Beta-blockers have potential antiangiogenic and antimigratory activity. Studies have demonstrated a survival benefit in patients with malignant melanoma treated with beta-blockers.
Objectives: To investigate the association between postdiagnostic beta-blocker usage and risk of melanoma-specific mortality in a population-based cohort of patients with malignant melanoma.
Methods: Patients with incident malignant melanoma diagnosed between 1998 and 2010 were identified within the U.K. Clinical Practice Research Datalink and confirmed using cancer registry data. Patients with malignant melanoma with a melanoma-specific death (cases) recorded by the Office of National Statistics were matched on year of diagnosis, age and sex to four malignant melanoma controls (who lived at least as long after diagnosis as their matched case). A nested case–control approach was used to investigate the association between postdiagnostic beta-blocker usage and melanoma-specific death and all-cause mortality. Conditional logistic regression was applied to generate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for beta-blocker use determined from general practitioner prescribing.
Results: Beta-blocker medications were prescribed after malignant melanoma diagnosis to 20·2% of 242 patients who died from malignant melanoma (cases) and 20·3% of 886 matched controls. Consequently, there was no association between beta-blocker use postdiagnosis and cancer-specific death (OR 0·99, 95% CI 0·68–1·42), which did not markedly alter after adjustment for confounders including stage (OR 0·87, 95% CI 0·56–1·34). No significant associations were detected for individual beta-blocker types, by defined daily doses of use or for all-cause mortality.
Conclusions: Contrary to some previous studies, beta-blocker use after malignant melanoma diagnosis was not associated with reduced risk of death from melanoma in this U.K. population-based study.
Resumo:
Background: Recent laboratory and epidemiological evidence suggests that beta-blockers could inhibit prostate cancer progression. Methods: We investigated the effect of beta-blockers on prostate cancer-specific mortality in a cohort of prostate cancer patients. Prostate cancer patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2006 were identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Database and confirmed by cancer registries. Patients were followed up to 2011 with deaths identified by the Office of National Statistics. A nested case-control analysis compared patients dying from prostate cancer (cases) with up to three controls alive at the time of their death, matched by age and year of diagnosis. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using conditional logistic regression. Results: Post-diagnostic beta-blocker use was identified in 25% of 1184 prostate cancer-specific deaths and 26% of 3531 matched controls. There was little evidence (P=0.40) of a reduction in the risk of cancer-specific death in beta-blocker users compared with non-users (OR=0.94 95% CI 0.81, 1.09). Similar results were observed after adjustments for confounders, in analyses by beta-blocker frequency, duration, type and for all-cause mortality. Conclusions: Beta-blocker usage after diagnosis was not associated with cancer-specific or all-cause mortality in prostate cancer patients in this large UK study.
Resumo:
Only long-term home oxygen therapy has been shown in randomised controlled trials to increase survival in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). There have been no trials assessing the effect of inhaled corticosteroids and long-acting bronchodilators, alone or in combination, on mortality in patients with COPD, despite their known benefit in reducing symptoms and exacerbations. The "TOwards a Revolution in COPD Health" (TORCH) survival study is aiming to determine the impact of salmeterol/fluticasone propionate (SFC) combination and the individual components on the survival of COPD patients. TORCH is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study. Approximately 6,200 patients with moderate-to-severe COPD were randomly assigned to b.i.d. treatment with either SFC (50/500 microg), fluticasone propionate (500 microg), salmeterol (50 microg) or placebo for 3 yrs. The primary end-point is all-cause mortality; secondary end-points are COPD morbidity relating to rate of exacerbations and health status, using the St George's Respiratory Questionnaire. Other end-points include other mortality and exacerbation end-points, requirement for long-term oxygen therapy, and clinic lung function. Safety end-points include adverse events, with additional information on bone fractures. The first patient was recruited in September 2000 and results should be available in 2006. This paper describes the "TOwards a Revolution in COPD Health" study and explains the rationale behind it.
Resumo:
Digoxin has been shown to have an estrogenic effect and is associated with increased risk of gynecomastia and estrogen-sensitive cancers such as breast and uterus cancer. These findings, particularly recent observations of increased breast cancer risk, raise questions about the safety of digoxin use in breast cancer patients. Therefore, we investigated whether digoxin use after breast cancer diagnosis increased the risk of breast cancer-specific mortality in breast cancer patients. A cohort of 17,842 breast cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2009 was identified from English cancer registries (from the National Cancer Data Repository). This cohort was linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (to provide digoxin and other prescription records) and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (to identify breast cancer-specific deaths). Using time-dependent Cox regression models, unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for the association between post-diagnostic exposure to digoxin and breast cancer-specific and all-cause mortality. In 17,842 breast cancer patients, there were 2219 breast cancer-specific deaths. Digoxin users appeared to have increased breast cancer-specific mortality compared with non-users (HR 1.73; 95 % CI 1.39–2.15) but this association was entirely attenuated after adjustment for potential confounders (adjusted HR 0.91; 95 % CI 0.72–1.14). In this large population-based breast cancer cohort study, there was little evidence of an increase in breast cancer-specific mortality with digoxin use after diagnosis. These results provide some reassurance that digoxin use is safe in breast cancer patients.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To investigate whether statins used after colorectal cancer diagnosis reduce the risk of colorectal cancer-specific mortality in a cohort of patients with colorectal cancer.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: A cohort of 7,657 patients with newly diagnosed stage I to III colorectal cancer were identified from 1998 to 2009 from the National Cancer Data Repository (comprising English cancer registry data). This cohort was linked to the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink, which provided prescription records, and to mortality data from the Office of National Statistics (up to 2012) to identify 1,647 colorectal cancer-specific deaths. Time-dependent Cox regression models were used to calculate hazard ratios (HR) for cancer-specific mortality and 95% CIs by postdiagnostic statin use and to adjust these HRs for potential confounders.
RESULTS: Overall, statin use after a diagnosis of colorectal cancer was associated with reduced colorectal cancer-specific mortality (fully adjusted HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.84). A dose-response association was apparent; for example, a more marked reduction was apparent in colorectal cancer patients using statins for more than 1 year (adjusted HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.79). A reduction in all-cause mortality was also apparent in statin users after colorectal cancer diagnosis (fully adjusted HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.84).
CONCLUSION: In this large population-based cohort, statin use after diagnosis of colorectal cancer was associated with longer rates of survival.
Resumo:
Background: Ischaemic heart disease (IHD) is the most common cause of death worldwide.
Aim: To determine the long-term impact of organisational interventions for secondary prevention of IHD.
Design and setting: Systematic review and meta-analysis of studies from CENTRAL, MEDLINE®, Embase, and CINAHL published January 2007 to January 2013.
Method: Searches were conducted for randomised controlled trials of patients with established IHD, with long-term follow-up, of cardiac secondary prevention programmes targeting organisational change in primary care or community settings. A random-effects model was used and risk ratios were calculated.
Results: Five studies were included with 4005 participants. Meta-analysis of four studies with mortality data at 4.7–6 years showed that organisational interventions were associated with approximately 20% reduced mortality, with a risk ratio (RR) for all-cause mortality of 0.79 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.66 to 0.93), and a RR for cardiac-related mortality of 0.74 (95% CI = 0.58 to 0.94). Two studies reported mortality data at 10 years. Analysis of these data showed no significant differences between groups. There were insufficient data to conduct a meta-analysis on the effect of interventions on hospital admissions. Additional analyses showed no significant association between organisational interventions and risk factor management or appropriate prescribing at 4.7–6 years.
Conclusion: Cardiac secondary prevention programmes targeting organisational change are associated with a reduced risk of death for at least 4–6 years. There is insufficient evidence to conclude whether this beneficial effect is maintained indefinitely.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The optimal ways of using aromatase inhibitors or tamoxifen as endocrine treatment for early breast cancer remains uncertain.
METHODS: We undertook meta-analyses of individual data on 31 920 postmenopausal women with oestrogen-receptor-positive early breast cancer in the randomised trials of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 5 years of tamoxifen; of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5; and of 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5 versus 5 years of tamoxifen. Primary outcomes were any recurrence of breast cancer, breast cancer mortality, death without recurrence, and all-cause mortality. Intention-to-treat log-rank analyses, stratified by age, nodal status, and trial, yielded aromatase inhibitor versus tamoxifen first-event rate ratios (RRs).
FINDINGS: In the comparison of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 5 years of tamoxifen, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors significantly during years 0-1 (RR 0·64, 95% CI 0·52-0·78) and 2-4 (RR 0·80, 0·68-0·93), and non-significantly thereafter. 10-year breast cancer mortality was lower with aromatase inhibitors than tamoxifen (12·1% vs 14·2%; RR 0·85, 0·75-0·96; 2p=0·009). In the comparison of 5 years of aromatase inhibitor versus 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors significantly during years 0-1 (RR 0·74, 0·62-0·89) but not while both groups received aromatase inhibitors during years 2-4, or thereafter; overall in these trials, there were fewer recurrences with 5 years of aromatase inhibitors than with tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitors (RR 0·90, 0·81-0·99; 2p=0·045), though the breast cancer mortality reduction was not significant (RR 0·89, 0·78-1·03; 2p=0·11). In the comparison of 2-3 years of tamoxifen then aromatase inhibitor to year 5 versus 5 years of tamoxifen, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors significantly during years 2-4 (RR 0·56, 0·46-0·67) but not subsequently, and 10-year breast cancer mortality was lower with switching to aromatase inhibitors than with remaining on tamoxifen (8·7% vs 10·1%; 2p=0·015). Aggregating all three types of comparison, recurrence RRs favoured aromatase inhibitors during periods when treatments differed (RR 0·70, 0·64-0·77), but not significantly thereafter (RR 0·93, 0·86-1·01; 2p=0·08). Breast cancer mortality was reduced both while treatments differed (RR 0·79, 0·67-0·92), and subsequently (RR 0·89, 0·81-0·99), and for all periods combined (RR 0·86, 0·80-0·94; 2p=0·0005). All-cause mortality was also reduced (RR 0·88, 0·82-0·94; 2p=0·0003). RRs differed little by age, body-mass index, stage, grade, progesterone receptor status, or HER2 status. There were fewer endometrial cancers with aromatase inhibitors than tamoxifen (10-year incidence 0·4% vs 1·2%; RR 0·33, 0·21-0·51) but more bone fractures (5-year risk 8·2% vs 5·5%; RR 1·42, 1·28-1·57); non-breast-cancer mortality was similar.
INTERPRETATION: Aromatase inhibitors reduce recurrence rates by about 30% (proportionately) compared with tamoxifen while treatments differ, but not thereafter. 5 years of an aromatase inhibitor reduces 10-year breast cancer mortality rates by about 15% compared with 5 years of tamoxifen, hence by about 40% (proportionately) compared with no endocrine treatment.
FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council.
Resumo:
Preclinical evidence suggests that metformin could delay cancer progression. Previous epidemiological studies however have been limited by small sample sizes and certain time-related biases. This study aimed to investigate whether colorectal cancer patients with type 2 diabetes who were exposed to metformin had reduced cancer-specific mortality. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1,197 colorectal cancer patients newly diagnosed from 1998 to 2009 (identified from English cancer registries) with type 2 diabetes (based upon Clinical Practice Research Datalink, CPRD, prescription and diagnosis records). In this cohort 382 colorectal cancer-specific deaths occurred up to 2012 from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) mortality data. Metformin use was identified from CPRD prescription records. Using time-dependent Cox regression models, unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HR) and 95% CIs were calculated for the association between post-diagnostic exposure to metformin and colorectal cancer-specific mortality. Overall, there was no evidence of an association between metformin use and cancer-specific death before or after adjustment for potential confounders (adjusted HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.80, 1.40). In addition, after adjustment for confounders, there was also no evidence of associations between other diabetic medications and cancer-specific mortality including sulfonylureas (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.86, 1.51), insulin use (HR 1.35, 95% CI 0.95, 1.93) or other anti-diabetic medications including thiazolidinediones (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.46, 1.14). Similar associations were observed by duration of use and for all-cause mortality. This population-based study, the largest to date, does not support a protective association between metformin and survival in colorectal cancer patients.
Resumo:
Background
Preclinical evidence suggests that aspirin may inhibit lung cancer progression. In a large cohort of lung cancer patients, we investigated whether low-dose aspirin use was associated with a reduction in the risk of lung cancer-specific mortality.
Methods
We identified lung cancer patients from English cancer registries diagnosed between 1998 to 2009 from the National Cancer Data Repository. Medication usage was obtained from linkages to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and lung cancer-specific deaths were identified from Office of National Statistics mortality data. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) for the association between low-dose aspirin use (before and after diagnosis) and risk of lung cancer-specific mortality were calculated using Cox regression models.
Results
A total of 14,735 lung cancer patients were identified during the study period. In analysis of 3,635 lung cancer patients, there was no suggestion of an association between low-dose aspirin use after diagnosis and cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR = 0.96, 95 % CI: 0.85, 1.09). Similarly, no association was evident for low-dose aspirin use before diagnosis and cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR = 1.00, 95 % CI: 0.95, 1.05). Associations were comparable by duration of use and for all-cause mortality.
Conclusion
Overall, we found little evidence of a protective association between low-dose aspirin use and cancer-specific mortality in a large population-based lung cancer cohort.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies have shown that statins, particularly simvastatin, can prevent growth in breast cancer cell lines and animal models. We investigated whether statins used after breast cancer diagnosis reduced the risk of breast cancer-specific, or all-cause, mortality in a large cohort of breast cancer patients.
METHODS: A cohort of 17,880 breast cancer patients, newly diagnosed between 1998 and 2009, was identified from English cancer registries (from the National Cancer Data Repository). This cohort was linked to the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, providing prescription records, and to the Office of National Statistics mortality data (up to 2013), identifying 3694 deaths, including 1469 deaths attributable to breast cancer. Unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for breast cancer-specific, and all-cause, mortality in statin users after breast cancer diagnosis were calculated using time-dependent Cox regression models. Sensitivity analyses were conducted using multiple imputation methods, propensity score methods and a case-control approach.
RESULTS: There was some evidence that statin use after a diagnosis of breast cancer had reduced mortality due to breast cancer and all causes (fully adjusted HR = 0.84 [95% confidence interval = 0.68-1.04] and 0.84 [0.72-0.97], respectively). These associations were more marked for simvastatin 0.79 (0.63-1.00) and 0.81 (0.70-0.95), respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: In this large population-based breast cancer cohort, there was some evidence of reduced mortality in statin users after breast cancer diagnosis. However, these associations were weak in magnitude and were attenuated in some sensitivity analyses.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND & AIMS: Individuals who began taking low-dose aspirin before they were diagnosed with colorectal cancer were reported to have longer survival times than patients who did not take this drug. We investigated survival times of patients who begin taking low-dose aspirin after a diagnosis of colorectal cancer in a large population-based cohort study.
METHODS: We performed a nested case-control analysis using a cohort of 4794 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer from 1998 through 2007, identified from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink and confirmed by cancer registries. There were 1559 colorectal cancer-specific deaths, recorded by the Office of National Statistics; these were each matched with up to 5 risk-set controls. Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), based on practitioner-recorded aspirin usage.
RESULTS: Overall, low-dose aspirin use after a diagnosis of colorectal cancer was not associated with colorectal cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR = 1.06; 95% CI: 0.92-1.24) or all-cause mortality (adjusted OR = 1.06; 95% CI: 0.94-1.19). A dose-response association was not apparent; for example, low-dose aspirin use for more than 1 year after diagnosis was not associated with colorectal cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR = 0.98; 95% CI: 0.82-1.19). There was also no association between low-dose aspirin usage and colon cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR = 1.02; 95% CI: 0.83-1.25) or rectal cancer-specific mortality (adjusted OR = 1.10; 95% CI: 0.88-1.38).
CONCLUSIONS: In a large population-based cohort, low-dose aspirin usage after diagnosis of colorectal cancer did not increase survival time.
Resumo:
Background: Preclinical evidence suggests that statins could delay cancer progression. Previous epidemiological findings have been inconsistent and some have been limited by small sample sizes, as well as certain time-related biases. This study aimed to investigate whether breast cancer patients who were exposed to statins had reduced breast cancer-specific mortality. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 15,140 newly diagnosed invasive breast cancer patients diagnosed from 2009 to 2012 within the Scottish Cancer Registry. Dispensed medication usage was obtained from linkages to the Scottish Prescribing Information System and breast cancer-specific deaths were identified from National Records of Scotland Death Records. Using time-dependent Cox regression models, hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the association between post-diagnostic exposure to statins (including simvastatin) and breast cancer-specific mortality. Adjustments were made for a range of potential confounders including age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, cancer stage, grade, cancer treatments received, comorbidities, socioeconomic status and use of aspirin. Results: A total of 1,190 breast cancer-specific deaths occurred up to January 2015. Overall, after adjustment for potential confounders, there was no evidence of an association between statin use and breast cancer-specific death (adjusted HR 0.93, 95 % CI 0.77, 1.12). No significant associations were observed in dose–response analyses or in analysis of all-cause mortality. For simvastatin use specifically, a weak non-significant reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality was observed compared to non-users (adjusted HR 0.89, 95 % CI 0.73, 1.08). Statin use before diagnosis was weakly associated with a reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality (adjusted HR 0.85, 95 % CI 0.74, 0.98). Conclusion: Overall, we found little evidence of a protective association between post-diagnostic statin use and cancer-specific mortality in a large nation-wide cohort of breast cancer patients. These findings will help inform the decision whether to conduct randomised controlled trials of statins as an adjuvant treatment in breast cancer.
Resumo:
Background: The influence of dietary fat upon breast cancer mortality remains largely understudied despite extensive investigation into its influence upon breast cancer risk
Objective: To conduct meta-analyses of studies to clarify the association between dietary fat and breast cancer mortality Design: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for relevant articles published up to March 2012. Risk of all-cause or breast cancer specific death was evaluated by combining multivariable adjusted estimates comparing highest versus lowest categories of intake; and per 20 gram increase in intake of total and/or saturated fat (g/day) using random-effects meta-analyses.
Results: Fifteen prospective cohort studies investigating total fat and/or saturated fat intake (g/day) and breast cancer mortality were included. There was no difference in risk of breast cancer specific death (n = 6; HR = 1.14; 95% CI: 0.86, 1.52; P = 0.34) or all cause death (n = 4; HR = 1.73; 95% CI: 0.82, 3.6; P = 0.15) for women in the highest versus lowest category of total fat intake. Breast cancer specific death (n = 5; HR = 1.63; 95% CI: 1.19, 2.24; p <0.01) was higher for women in the highest versus lowest category of saturated fat intake.
Conclusions: These meta-analyses have shown that saturated fat intake negatively impacts upon breast cancer survival.
Resumo:
Objective: To examine changes in temporal trends in breast cancer mortality in women living in 30 European countries.
Design: Retrospective trend analysis.
Data source: WHO mortality database on causes of deaths
Subjects reviewed: Female deaths from breast cancer from 1989 to 2006
Main outcome measures: Changes in breast cancer mortality for all women and by age group (<50, 50-69, and >= 70 years) calculated from linear regressions of log transformed, age adjusted death rates. Joinpoint analysis was used to identify the year when trends in all age mortality began to change.
Results: From 1989 to 2006, there was a median reduction in breast cancer mortality of 19%, ranging from a 45% reduction in Iceland to a 17% increase in Romania. Breast cancer mortality decreased by >= 20% in 15 countries, and the reduction tended to be greater in countries with higher mortality in 1987-9. England and Wales, Northern Ireland, and Scotland had the second, third, and fourth largest decreases of 35%, 29%, and 30%, respectively. In France, Finland, and Sweden, mortality decreased by 11%, 12%, and 16%, respectively. In central European countries mortality did not decline or even increased during the period. Downward mortality trends usually started between 1988 and 1996, and the persistent reduction from 1999 to 2006 indicates that these trends may continue. The median changes in the age groups were -37% (range -76% to -14%) in women aged <50, -21% (-40% to 14%) in 50-69 year olds, and -2% (-42% to 80%) in >= 70 year olds.
Conclusions: Changes in breast cancer mortality after 1988 varied widely between European countries, and the UK is among the countries with the largest reductions. Women aged <50 years showed the greatest reductions in mortality, also in countries where screening at that age is uncommon. The increasing mortality in some central European countries reflects avoidable mortality.
Resumo:
Three Gyps vulture species are on the brink of extinction in South Asia owing to the veterinary non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) diclofenac. Carcasses of domesticated ungulates are the main food source for Asia's vultures and birds die from kidney failure after consuming diclofenac-contaminated tissues. Here, we report on the safety testing of the NSAID ketoprofen, which was not reported to cause mortality in clinical treatment of scavenging birds and is rapidly eliminated from livestock tissues. Safety testing was undertaken using captive non-releasable Cape griffon vultures (Gyps coprotheres) and wild-caught African white-backed vultures (G. africanus), both previously identified as susceptible to diclofenac and suitable surrogates. Ketoprofen doses ranged from 0.5 to 5 mg kg(-1) vulture body weight, based upon recommended veterinary guidelines and maximum levels of exposure for wild vultures (estimated as 1.54 mg kg(-1)). Doses were administered by oral gavage or through feeding tissues from cattle dosed with ketoprofen at 6 mg kg(-1) cattle body weight, before slaughter. Mortalities occurred at dose levels of 1.5 and 5 mg kg(-1) vulture body weight (within the range recommended for clinical treatment) with the same clinical signs as observed for diclofenac. Surveys of livestock carcasses in India indicate that toxic levels of residual ketoprofen are already present in vulture food supplies. Consequently, we strongly recommend that ketoprofen is not used for veterinary treatment of livestock in Asia and in other regions of the world where vultures access livestock carcasses. The only alternative to diclofenac that should be promoted as safe for vultures is the NSAID meloxicam.
