Systematic Reviews
Copyright ©The Author(s) 2021.
World J Gastroenterol. Nov 28, 2021; 27(44): 7716-7733
Published online Nov 28, 2021. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v27.i44.7716
Table 5 Summary of treatment studies
AuthorCenterStudy designCancer stage and typeCancer treatmentPPI use (definition)No. of patientsResults
Zhang et al[39] 2017Guangzhou, ChinaRStage II-III Rectal cancerLCRT (46 Gy, Oxaliplatin + Capecitabine (2 cycles)EOU = OME: 20 mg PO, min. OD for 6 d / 40 mg IVI, daily). EOG = total OME dose ≥ 200 mg1125EOG vs non-EOG: 1DFS (3-year) = 77.1% vs 96.6%, P = 0.032, DFS (5-year) = 69.6% vs 46.7%, P = 0.032, OS (3-year) = 82.3% vs 96.6%, P = 0.092, OS (5-year) = 76.9% vs 89.5%, P = 0.092 EOU vs non-EOU: 1DFS (3-year) = 85.5% vs 77.8%, P = 0.658, DFS (5-year) = 75.6% vs 74.6%, P = 0.658, OS (3-year) = 90.3% vs 82.5%, P = 0.754, OS (5-year) = 82% vs 77.6%, P = 0.754
Sun et al[40] 2016Edmonton, CanadaRStage I-III CRCAdjuvant Capecitabine monotherapyAny use during treatment (based on prescription data)298PPI-user vs non-users: RFS (5 years) = 74% vs 83%, P = 0.03; OS (5-year) = 81% vs 78%, P = 0.7. Multivariate RFS (5-year): HR (95%CI) = 1.65 (0.93-2.94), P = 0.09
Wong et al[41] 2019Alberta, CanadaRStage II-III CRCAdjuvant CapeOx or FOLFOX Any use during treatment (based on prescription data)389PPI-users vs non-users, RFS (3-year): CapeOX = 69.5% vs 82.6%, P = 0.03; FOLFOX = 82.9% vs 61.7%, P = 0.7; Multivariate RFS: HR (95%CI) = 2.20 (1.14-4.25) P = 0.018; OS (3-year): CapeOX = 90.1% vs 91.2%, P = 0.345, FOLFOX = 77.4% vs 80.1%, P = 0.929
Kichenadasse et al[42] 20216 clinical trialsRetrospective post-hoc analysis of RCTStage IV CRC Fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy (± additional agents). Regimens differed across included trialsMinimum 7 d of use during study period 5633OS: Significantly worse in PPI-users [HR (95%CI) = 1.20 (1.03-1.40)], P = 0.02; PFS: Significantly worse in PPI-users [HR (95%CI) = 1.20 (1.05-1.37)], P = 0.009 Various treatment subgroups did not influence OS and PFS
Kim et al[43] 2021China, Japan, South Korea (98 centers)Retrospective post-hoc analysis of RCTStage IV CRC mXELIRI or FOLFIRI (± Bevacizumab)Use for ≥ 20% of study period 620mXELIRI arm: No difference in OS or PFSFOLFIRI arm: Significantly better OS [HR (95%CI) = 0.5 (0.3-0.85), P = 0.11] and PFS [HR (95%CI) = 0.55 (0.33-0.91), P = 0.20] in PPI users