Association between antidepressant medication use and epithelial ovarian cancer risk: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of observational studies

Abstract

AIMThe aim of this paper is to clarify the inconsistent findings in the association between antidepressant use and the risk of epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC). METHODSThis study is a meta-analysis of observational studies retrieved from the PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases prior to August 15, 2017. Two researchers independently screened studies and extracted study characteristics and risk estimates. The odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of EOC risk were summarized using an inverse variance weighted randomeffects model. Heterogeneity between studies was assessed with the I 2 statistic. RESULTSEight case-control studies involving 7878 EOC cases and 73 913 controls were identified. Compared with non-use, use of antidepressants was not significantly associated with EOC risk (summarized OR = 1.10, 95% CI: 0.91-1.32, I 2 = 74.4%). Similar null results were also observed in the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (OR = 1.04, 95% CI = 0.80-1.35), tricyclic antidepressants (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.79-1.30), and other antidepressant drugs (OR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.74-1.12). Subgroup analyses of study characteristics, stratified by the type of control subjects, geographic location, exposure assessment, number of cases, and adjustment for potential confounders, showed that the ORs were broadly consistent across strata. The OR per 1 yearincrement of duration was 0.99 (95% CI = 0.94-1.05, I 2 = 40.0%, P = 0.154). Additionally, the OR for the greatest intensity of antidepressant use compared with never use was 0.82 (95% CI = 0.70-0.98, I 2 = 0%, P = 0.489). Furthermore, no evidence of publication bias was detected through Funnel plots as well as Egger's and Begg's tests. CONCLUSIONSThere is no association between antidepressant use and EOC risk. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings. British Journal of Clinical PharmacologyBr J Clin Pharmacol (2018) 84 649-658 649

Preoperative anemia as a prognostic factor in patients with lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological studies

“…Studies that accounted for the largest share of heterogeneity were sequentially and cumulatively excluded until I 2 was < 50%. Then, further examinations were conducted to determine whether the risk estimates were consistent 45, 46. All statistical analyses were performed using the Stata statistical software package (ver.…”

Is Autophagy Involved in the Diverse Effects of Antidepressants?

“…For example, a case-control study using the General Practice Research Database (GPRD) and examining a total of 31,953 cases of cancer (matched to controls) concluded that lung, breast and prostate cancers were largely unaffected, while TCAs may actually display preventive effects for colorectal cancer and glioma [98]. Furthermore, analysis of 7878 cases of epithelial ovarian cancer and 73,913 controls revealed no association between antidepressant use and the risk for this type of cancer [99]. Likewise, antidepressant use was not correlated with a recurrence of breast cancer [100].…”

Impact of postdiagnostic statin use on ovarian cancer mortality: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of observational studies

“…To assess the risk of bias of the included studies, two individuals independently used the Newcastle–Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies relying only on the information presented in the reports and making no assumptions. Any disagreements were referred to a third team member.…”

“…The Newcastle–Ottawa quality assessment scale uses the three quality parameters of selection, comparability, and exposure/outcome assessment. Subsequently, studies that achieved a full rating in at least two categories of these three assessments were considered to have a low risk of bias .…”