Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the esophageal inflammation-metaplasia-adenocarcinoma sequence

Observational studies suggest that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) reduce the risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma, but it is not known at what stage they may act in the esophageal inflammation-metaplasia-adenocarcinoma sequence. In an all-Ireland case-control study, we investigated the relationship between the use of NSAIDs and risk of reflux esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma. Patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma, long-segment Barrett's esophagus and population controls were recruited from throughout Ireland. Esophagitis patients were recruited from Northern Ireland only. Data were collected on known and potential risk factors for esophageal adenocarcinoma and on the use of NSAIDs, including aspirin, at least 1 year before interview. Associations between use of NSAIDs and the stages of the esophageal inflammation-metaplasia-adenocarcinoma sequence were estimated by multiple logistic regression. In total, 230 reflux esophagitis, 224 Barrett's esophagus, and 227 esophageal adenocarcinoma and 260 population controls were recruited. Use of aspirin and NSAIDs was associated with a reduced risk of Barrett's esophagus [odds ratio [OR; 95% confidence interval (95% CI)], 0.53 (0.31-0.90) and 0.40 (0.19-0.81), respectively] and esophageal adenocarcinoma [OR (95% CI), 0.57 (0.36-0.93) and 0.58 (0.31-1.08), respectively]. Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma patients were less likely than controls to have used NSAIDs. Selection or recall bias may explain these results and the results of previous observational studies indicating a protective effect of NSAIDs against esophageal adenocarcinoma. If NSAIDs have a true protective effect on the esophageal inflammation-metaplasia-adenocarcinoma sequence, they may act early in the sequence.

Repeat prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs excluding aspirin:how careful are we?

About 5% of all National Health Service prescriptions in Britain and a quarter of reports of suspected adverse reactions are accounted for by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Their prescription was investigated in two computerised group practices serving 11850 patients. Altogether 198 patients receiving repeat prescriptions of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were identified and relevant clinical details extracted from their notes. Of these patients, 119 were over 65 years old; 172 were receiving one of six different non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; and 76 were taking drugs that can interact with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Ninety one patients had one or more medical conditions that may be aggravated by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and 36 had experienced side effects important enough for their treatment to be changed. A questionnaire to assess opinions and knowledge of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs was given to 42 general practitioners and 26 rheumatologists. Although the two groups showed a comparable knowledge of the properties and costs of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, they differed significantly in their views on the circumstances under which these drugs should be used. Clear guidelines on the prescription of these drugs would indicate when careful monitoring is essential for patients to benefit from them safely.