4.4 Article

Use of 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors and survival of oesophageal and gastric cancer in a nationwide Swedish cohort study

期刊

ACTA ONCOLOGICA
卷 62, 期 5, 页码 438-443

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/0284186X.2023.2214681

关键词

Stomach neoplasms; oesophageal neoplasms; 5-alpha reductase inhibitors; gonadal steroid hormones; prognosis

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This nationwide Swedish study found no evidence to support the hypothesis that the use of 5-ARIs improves survival in patients with oesophago-gastric cancer.
BackgroundWe hypothesised that the use of the anti-androgenic drug 5 alpha-reductase inhibitors (5-ARIs) improves survival in patients with oesophago-gastric cancer.MethodsThis nationwide Swedish population-based cohort study included men who underwent surgery for oesophageal or gastric cancer between 2006-2015, with follow-up until the end of 2020. Multivariable Cox regression estimated hazard ratios (HR) for associations between 5-ARIs use and 5-year all-cause mortality (main outcome) and 5-year disease-specific mortality (secondary outcome). The HR was adjusted for age, comorbidity, education, calendar year, neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy, tumour stage, and resection margin status.ResultsAmong 1769 patients with oesophago-gastric cancer, 64 (3.6%) were users of 5-ARIs. Compared to non-users, users of 5-ARIs were not at any decreased risk of 5-year all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.79-1.63) or 5-year disease-specific mortality (adjusted HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.79-1.52). Use of 5-ARIs was not associated with any decreased risk of 5-year all-cause mortality in subgroup analyses stratified by categories of age, comorbidity, tumour stage, or tumour subtype (oesophageal or cardia adenocarcinoma, non-cardia gastric adenocarcinoma, or oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma).ConclusionThis study did not support the hypothesis of improved survival among users of 5-ARIs after curatively intended treatment for oesophago-gastric cancer.

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

4.4
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