Victoria Rotshild1, Laurent Azoulay2,3, Majd Zarifeh4, Reem Masarwa1, Bruria Hirsh-Raccah1, Amichai Perlman1, Mordechai Muszkat5, Ilan Matok6. 1. Pharmacoepidemiology Research Lab, Division of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, School of Pharmacy, Institute for Drug Research, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, P.O.B 12065, 9112001, Jerusalem, Israel. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics, and Occupational Health, Centre for Clinical Epidemiology, Jewish General Hospital, Lady Davis Institute, Montreal, Canada. 3. Gerald Bronfman Department of Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. 4. Hadassah Braun School of Public and Community Medicine, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel. 5. Department of Medicine, Hadassah University Hospital Mt. Scopus, Jerusalem, Israel. 6. Pharmacoepidemiology Research Lab, Division of Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, School of Pharmacy, Institute for Drug Research, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, P.O.B 12065, 9112001, Jerusalem, Israel. Ilan.Matok@ekmd.huji.ac.il.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: There are conflicting findings regarding the association between the use of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and the risk of lung cancer. Considering the public health importance of lung cancer prevention, and emerging evidence of a significant biologic role of calcium channel regulation in the development of lung cancer, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the risk of lung cancer in CCB users compared with non-CCB users. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive systematic search of leading medical databases for observational studies published up to December 2017 that examined CCB use and the risk of lung cancer. We used random-effects models to pool results. The impact of duration of CCB use on the estimated effect size was explored using random effects meta-regression. RESULTS: Ten studies (six cohort and four case-control studies) that evaluated the overall cancer risk among 38,758 CCB users were included in the analysis. Overall risk ratio (RR) for CCB use and lung cancer was 1.15 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.32). Subgroup analysis by duration of CCB use suggested that the observed increase in lung cancer risk was driven by the results of five studies with prolonged (≥ 4 years) exposure (RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.08-1.30). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests exposure to CCBs is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer. Considering their widespread use, and the paucity of data on the long-term effects of chronic exposure to CCBs, these results are reason for concern and warrant further investigation. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The protocol for this study was registered at the PROSPERO registry of systematic reviews (registry number: CRD42017056362).
INTRODUCTION: There are conflicting findings regarding the association between the use of calcium channel blockers (CCBs) and the risk of lung cancer. Considering the public health importance of lung cancer prevention, and emerging evidence of a significant biologic role of calcium channel regulation in the development of lung cancer, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the risk of lung cancer in CCB users compared with non-CCB users. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive systematic search of leading medical databases for observational studies published up to December 2017 that examined CCB use and the risk of lung cancer. We used random-effects models to pool results. The impact of duration of CCB use on the estimated effect size was explored using random effects meta-regression. RESULTS: Ten studies (six cohort and four case-control studies) that evaluated the overall cancer risk among 38,758 CCB users were included in the analysis. Overall risk ratio (RR) for CCB use and lung cancer was 1.15 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.32). Subgroup analysis by duration of CCB use suggested that the observed increase in lung cancer risk was driven by the results of five studies with prolonged (≥ 4 years) exposure (RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.08-1.30). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests exposure to CCBs is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer. Considering their widespread use, and the paucity of data on the long-term effects of chronic exposure to CCBs, these results are reason for concern and warrant further investigation. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: The protocol for this study was registered at the PROSPERO registry of systematic reviews (registry number: CRD42017056362).
Authors: Sripal Bangalore; Sunil Kumar; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Harikrishna Makani; Ehud Grossman; Jørn Wetterslev; Ajay K Gupta; Peter S Sever; Christian Gluud; Franz H Messerli Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2010-11-29 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Ilke Sipahi; Josephine Chou; Prasun Mishra; Sara M Debanne; Daniel I Simon; James C Fang Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2011-05-19 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: S Braun; V Boyko; S Behar; H Reicher-Reiss; S Laniado; E Kaplinsky; U Goldbourt Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 1998-03-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Neela Guha; Franco Merletti; Nelson Kyle Steenland; Andrea Altieri; Vincent Cogliano; Kurt Straif Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2009-10-22 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Elvin S Cheng; Marianne F Weber; Julia Steinberg; Karen Canfell; Xue Qin Yu Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2022-05-27 Impact factor: 4.322
Authors: José A Carlos-Escalante; Marcela de Jesús-Sánchez; Alejandro Rivas-Castro; Pavel S Pichardo-Rojas; Claudia Arce; Talia Wegman-Ostrosky Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 6.244