Evidence Hub

Proton pump inhibitor use and pancreatic risk: evidence from the UK biobank participants and animal experiments

Xin Gao, Zouhua Xu, Qingxie Liu, Chenchen Yuan, Xiaowu Dong, Xiaolei Shi, Qingtian Zhu, Keyan Wu et al.

Frontiers in Pharmacology, 2025

489,394 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Introduction Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely prescribed for gastrointestinal disorders and are often used empirically in patients with pancreatic disease, yet their long-term impact on pancreatic health remains unclear. We evaluated whether regular PPI use is associated with risks of acute pancreatitis (AP), chronic pancreatitis (CP), and pancreatic cancer (PC). Methods We analyzed 489,394 UK Biobank participants aged 38–73 years, comparing regular PPI users with non-users and with histamine-2 receptor antagonist (H2RA) users as an active comparator. Associations with incident pancreatic outcomes were estimated using Cox regression models, landmark analysis, and propensity score matching, supplemented by multiple sensitivity analyses, including stratified/interaction analyses, E-values, time-varying exposure models with immortal-time correction, dfbeta residuals correction, stricter follow-up with Firth penalization, full-cohort multivariable modeling, and alternative matching (disease risk score 1:1, entropy balancing). Complementary in vivo experiments used a cerulein-induced acute pancreatitis mouse model to examine the effects of short- and long-term PPI administration on pancreatic inflammation and histopathology. Results In primary analyses, regular PPI use showed a time-dependent association with acute pancreatitis. However, this association was not robust: multiple sensitivity analyses indicated instability of the finding. Experimental validation in mice…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 489,394 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