4.7 Article

A Population-Based Description of Familial Clustering of Pancreatic Cancer

期刊

CLINICAL GASTROENTEROLOGY AND HEPATOLOGY
卷 8, 期 9, 页码 812-816

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.cgh.2010.05.012

关键词

GIF; Pancreas Cancer; Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma; Genetics; Familial Risk; UPDB

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute [N01-PC-35141, P01-CA073992, R01-CA040641]
  2. Utah State Department of Health
  3. University of Utah
  4. University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Institute [LM009331]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Several familial pancreatic cancer syndromes have been identified. However, the prevalence of familial pancreatic cancers in the general population has not been well defined. METHODS: We linked pancreatic cancer cases, identified through the Utah Cancer Registry, to the Utah Population Database, which contains genealogic data from Utah pioneers and their descendants. This database includes 1411 pancreatic adenocarcinoma cases with 3 or more generations of Utah pioneer genealogy. We examined the familial clustering of pancreatic cancer by evaluating the relative risk (RR) of pancreatic cancer among relatives of cases. We also used the genealogical index of familiality to test the hypothesis of no excess relatedness among pancreatic cancer cases. RESULTS: The risk of pancreatic cancer was significantly increased in first-degree (RR, 1.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.47-2.29; P < .0001) and second-degree (RR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.31-2.91; P < .0001) relatives of individuals with pancreatic cancer. Analysis of case relatedness indicated significant excess relatedness for pancreatic cancer. More than 300 high-risk pedigrees were identified, with from 3-14 cases observed among descendants of pedigree founders. CONCLUSIONS: This population-based study provides evidence for increased risk of pancreatic cancer among relatives of cases and for a significantly higher average relatedness among cases than expected. These observations support the role of genetic factors in pancreatic 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

4.7
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