Evidence Hub

GERD and Upper Aerodigestive Tract Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Janice Jing Huang, Nicolas J. Jo, Garrett Forman, Tonya Aaron, Sophia J. Peifer, Soumil Prasad, Luke van Leeuwen, Laura Wild et al.

The Laryngoscope, 2025

1,768,394 participants · 2 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is highly prevalent, yet its association with upper aerodigestive tract (UADT) cancers beyond esophageal adenocarcinoma remains incompletely defined. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantify the risk of specific UADT cancers in individuals with GERD. DATA SOURCES: A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL was conducted for studies published from January 2000 to October 2024. REVIEW METHODS: Observational studies (cohort or case-control) evaluating GERD as a risk factor for UADT cancers in adults were included, following PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD42024602545). Esophageal adenocarcinoma was excluded due to its well-established association with GERD. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Pooled relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random effects models. RESULTS: Seventeen studies (12 case-control, 5 cohort), encompassing 1,768,394 participants, met inclusion criteria. GERD was significantly associated with laryngeal cancer (RR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.19-2.31). No significant associations were found for pharyngeal, oropharyngeal, hypopharyngeal, or esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Subgroup analysis showed stronger associations in U.S.-based studies (RR = 1.61) and in studies using ICD-coded GERD (RR = 1.93). CONCLUSION: GERD is associated with an increased risk of laryngeal cancer. Findings support further…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a systematic review, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,768,394 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free