Evidence Hub

Risk Factors and Incidence of Gastric Cancer After Detection of Helicobacter pylori Infection: A Large Cohort Study

Shria Kumar, D. Metz, S. Ellenberg, David E. Kaplan, D. Goldberg

Gastroenterology, 2019

371,813 participants · 237 citations

Abstract

Background & Aims: Nearly all studies of gastric adenocarcinoma in the United States have relied on national cancer databases, which do not include data on Helicobacter pylori infection, the most well-known risk factor for gastric cancer. We collected data from a large cohort of patients in the United States to calculate the incidence of and risk factors for non-proximal gastric adenocarcinomas after detection of H pylori. Secondary aims included identifying how treatment and eradication affect cancer risk. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study, collecting data from the Veterans Health Administration on 371,813 patients (median age, 62 years; 92.3% male) who received a diagnosis of H pylori infection from January 1, 1994 through December 31, 2018. The primary outcome was a diagnosis of distal gastric adenocarcinoma 30 days or more after detection of H pylori infection. We performed time to event with competing risk analysis (death before cancer a competing risk). Results: The cumulative incidence of cancer at 5, 10, and 20 years after detection of H pylori infection was 0.37%, 0.5%, and 0.65%, respectively. Factors associated with cancer included older age at time of detection of H pylori infection (sub-hazard ratio [SHR], 1.13; 95% CI, 1.11–1.15; P<.001), black/African American race (SHR, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.80–2.22), Asian race (SHR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.64–3.89) (P<.001 for race), Hispanic or Latino ethnicity (SHR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.34–1.87; P<.001), or history of…

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: 371,813 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