Search

Background & Aims: Regular use of aspirin and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) has been reported to reduce risks of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) and esophagogastric junctional adenocarcinoma (EGJA). However, individual studies have been too small to accurately assess the effects of medication type, frequency, or duration of use. We performed a pooled analysis to investigate these associations., Methods: We performed a pooled analysis of 6 population-based studies within the Barrett's and Esophageal Adenocarcinoma Consortium to evaluate the association between NSAID use and the risk of EAC and EGJA, using uniform exposure definitions. We collected information from 6 studies (5 case-control and 1 cohort), with a total of 1226 EAC and 1140 EGJA cases, on aspirin and/or NSAID use. Study-specific odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariate adjusted logistic regression models and then pooled using a random effects meta-analysis model., Results: Compared with nonusers, individuals who have used NSAIDs had a statistically significant reduced risk of EAC (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.56-0.83); they also appeared to have a reduced risk of EGJA (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.66-1.03). Similar reductions in risk were observed among individuals who took aspirin or nonaspirin NSAIDs. The highest levels of frequency (daily or more frequently) and duration (≥10 years) of NSAID use were associated with an approximately 40% reduction in risk of EAC, with ORs of 0.56 (95% CI, 0.43-0.73; P(trend) < .001) and 0.63 (95% CI, 0.45-0.90; P(trend) = .04), respectively., Conclusions: Although reverse causation could, in part, explain the inverse association observed between NSAID use and EAC risk, our pooled analysis suggests a possible role for NSAIDs in prevention of adenocarcinomas of the esophagus and esophagogastric junction., (Copyright © 2012 AGA Institute. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The use of proxy respondents in surveys designed to provide population estimates of smoking prevalence offers an inexpensive way to obtain these data. The accuracy of this information is examined in analyzing data from tobacco use surveys of adults conducted in 22 North American communities as part of the National Cancer Institute's Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation. Proxy-reported smoking status was obtained in a cross-sectional telephone survey conducted from August 1993 to January 1994 (n = 99,682). Self-reported smoking status was obtained from an in-depth interview of a sample of the respondents aged 25-64 years enumerated from the telephone survey (n = 31,417). Discrepancy rates were calculated by comparing the proxy-reported and self-reported smoking statuses of a given individual (n = 10,226). In both surveys, respondents were categorized as current smokers (those who currently smoke and have smoked at least 100 cigarettes in their lifetime), recent quitters (< or = 8 years since cessation), long-term quitters (> 8 years since cessation), and never smokers. The overall discrepancy rate between the self-report and the proxy report was 5.4%. Self-respondents who were black, Hispanic, Asian, recent quitters, or aged 25-34 years were more likely to have inconsistent proxy reports. The authors estimate that the screener interview underestimated the true smoking prevalence by 0.1% when they corrected for smoking status discrepancies. These results confirm that proxy-reported smoking status is an accurate and effective means to monitor populationwide smoking prevalence of adults.