4.7 Article

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and the risk of nonmelanoma skin cancer

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 137, 期 1, 页码 144-153

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.29357

关键词

nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs; nonmelanoma skin cancer; basal cell carcinoma; squamous cell carcinoma; case-control analysis

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been assigned a promising role in the chemoprevention of various malignancies. However, epidemiological data on the association between NSAID use and nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) are limited. To explore whether patients regularly exposed to systemic NSAIDs are at a reduced risk of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) or squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), we conducted a population-based case-control analysis using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, a United Kingdom primary care database. We identified 65,398 patients with incident BCC and 7,864 patients with incident SCC diagnosed between 1995 and 2013 and matched 1 and 4 NMSC-free controls to each BCC and SCC case, respectively, on age, sex, general practice, calendar time and years of history in the database. We compared prior NSAID exposure between cases and controls using multivariate conditional logistic regression analyses controlling for several potential confounders. Overall, we found no association between NSAID use and BCC, but when looking exclusively at users of single NSAID substances there was a suggestion of a reduced BCC risk in regular users of aspirin and ibuprofen (adjusted odds ratio [adj. OR]: 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85-0.99 and adj. OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.78, respectively). The risk of SCC was slightly decreased in regular users of any NSAIDs (adj. OR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.82-0.97), with the strongest risk reduction observed in current users of coxibs (adj. OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.62-0.95). These findings provide evidence that patients predisposed to NMSC might benefit from chemoprevention with NSAIDs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据