4.5 Article

Family history of gastric cancer is associated with the risk of colorectal neoplasia in Korean population

Journal

DIGESTIVE AND LIVER DISEASE
Volume 49, Issue 10, Pages 1155-1161

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.dld.2017.07.006

Keywords

Colorectal neoplasia; Family history; Gastric cancer

Funding

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant - Korea government (Ministry of Science and ICT) [NRF-2017R1A2B4004988]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Family history of cancers at different sites except for colorectum has not been evaluated as a risk factor for colorectal neoplasia (CRN). Aims: To investigate CRN risk according to family history of cancers at 12 different sites, including stomach and colorectum. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed on 139,497 asymptomatic Koreans who underwent colonoscopy as part of a health check-up. Results: The mean age of the study population was 41.6 and the prevalence of CRN was 16.3%. Multivariate analyses revealed that family histories of CRC (adjusted odds ratio; confidence interval, 1.26; 1.17-1.35) and gastric cancer (1.07; 1.01-1.13) were independent risk factors for CRN. Notably, the risk of CRN increased even more for participants with family histories of both CRC and gastric cancer (1.38; 1.12-1.70). Family history of CRC was associated with risk of CRN in participants aged both <50 and >50 years, whereas family history of gastric cancer was associated with risk of CRN in participants aged <50 years (1.22; 1.14-1.30), but not in participants aged >= 50 years (1.08; 0.99-1.18). Conclusions: Family history of gastric cancer was an independent risk factor for CRN, especially in those aged <50years. Persons with family histories of gastric cancer and CRC, especially those with family histories of both, may need to begin colonoscopy earlier. (C) 2017 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available