Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 365

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Relation of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Its Treatment to Adenocarcinomas of the Esophagus and Gastric Cardia

Chow, Wong-Ho·1995·JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship of gastrointestinal disorders and their treatment to the risk of adenocarcinomas of the esophagus and gastric cardia (AEC). DESIGN: A medical record-based case-control study, with data collected on a standardized form by a trained abstractor, blind to the case-control status. SETTING: A large prepaid health plan. SUBJECTS: Case patients were plan members newly diagnosed with histologically confirmed AEC from 1986 to 1992. For each of the 196 eligible case patients, one control was selected who matched for membership at time of diagnosis, sex, year of birth, and duration of membership. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Association between AEC and history of gastroesophageal conditions and their treatment. Conditional logistic regression procedures were used for calculation of odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (Cls), with adjustment for race, smoking status, and body mass index. Medications were grouped into H2 antagonists (cimetidine, ranitidine, famotidine, and nizatidine) and anticholinergics (propantheline bromide, dicyclomine hydrochloride, Donnatal [combination of atropine sulfate, hyoscyamine sulfate, phenobarbital, and scopolamine hydrobromide], and Librax [combination of chlordiazepoxide hydrochloride and clidinium bromide]). RESULTS: Significant twofold or greater risks of AEC were associated with a history of esophageal reflux, hiatal hernia, esophagitis/esophageal ulcer, and difficulty swallowing. The ORs increased with increasing number of these conditions. Although a fourfold risk was linked to four or more prescriptions for H2 antagonists, the risk was reduced to 1.5 (95% Cl, 0.4 to 5.4) after adjusting for the predisposing conditions. Further analysis revealed that the excess risk was restricted to persons with a history of gastroesophageal reflux and related conditions. No association was observed for overall use of anticholinergics. However, after adjustment for predisposing conditions, ORs decreased with increasing number of prescriptions for anticholinergics (P for trend = .08) CONCLUSIONS: This study provides reassuring findings that use of H2 antagonists and anticholinergics does not increase AEC risk. It also quantifies the elevated risk of AEC associated with gastroesophageal reflux disease. Further research into reflux disease and the production of premalignant epithelial changes may help elucidate carcinogenic mechanisms and measures aimed at early detection and prevention of AEC.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.1995.03530060048032

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 365

Metadata

Authors
Chow, W.-H.
Venue
JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Published
1995-08-09
Volume
274
Issue
6
Pages
474
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
OpenAlex
W2095565370
Cited by
365
References
0
FWCI
12.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Relation of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Its Treatment to Adenocarcinomas of the Esophagus and Gastric Cardia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.1995.03530060048032
The paper
Chow, W.-H. (1995). The Relation of Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease and Its Treatment to Adenocarcinomas of the Esophagus and Gastric Cardia. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1995.03530060048032

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.