Cited by 12Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchGenetic factors in colorectal cancerGlobal Cancer Incidence and Screening

Survival in Familial Pancreatic Cancer

Ji, Jianguang, Försti, Asta, Sundquist, Jan, Lenner, Per, Hemminki, Kari·2008·Pancreatology

Abstract

Background Family history has been reported to be associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer. However, its possible influence on pancreatic cancer survival has rarely been studied, probably because of the rareness of cases in the same family.Methods We used the nationwide Swedish Family-Cancer Database to examine the survival differences between familial and sporadic pancreatic cancers. Hazard ratios (HRs) for cause-specific and overall survival in pancreatic cancer were examined. HRs show the probability of death in the study group compared to the reference group.Results A total of 75 familial pancreatic cancers were noted. HRs were significantly higher among offspring with an affected parent compared to those without an affected parent; for cause-specific and overall survival, the HRs were 1.44 and 1.37, respectively. Reversing the analysis and deriving HRs for parents (offspring as probands) showed that familial pancreatic cancer had a worse prognosis than sporadic cases (HR 1.37 for cause-specific and 1.28 for overall survival). The HRs were close to unity among spouses with concordant pancreatic cancer.Conclusion The data show that survival in familial pancreatic cancer is worse than that in sporadic disease, which could be explained by genetic factors, if other confounding factors can be excluded. and IAP.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1159/000134272

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The comparison of outcomes between screen-detected PDAC and PDAC diagnosed after dropping out of surveillance is worthwhile because these groups have similar demographic/risk characteristics, but the number of such cases was small.

    “Comparing outcomes of those diagnosed with a screen-detected PDAC to those whose PDAC was diagnosed after dropping out of surveillance is worthwhile because these groups have similar demographic/risk characteristics, and for whom data on pancreatic cancer outcomes is limited,41-43 but the number of such cases was small.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ji, J., Försti, A., Sundquist, J., Lenner, P., & Hemminki, K.
Affiliations
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
  • German Cancer Research Center (DE)
  • University Hospital of Umeå (SE)
Corresponding author
Ji, Jianguang
Venue
Pancreatology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-06
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
252-256
ISSN
1424-3903 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2034350466
Cited by
12
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Pancreatology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lund University Publications (Lund University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Forskningsrådet för Arbetsliv och Socialvetenskap
  • Deutsche Krebshilfe
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
Keywords
familial pancreatic cancer, family history (medicine), sporadic pancreatic cancer, cause-specific survival, overall survival, hereditary cancer, genetic susceptibility, Swedish Family-Cancer Database
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Family Health, Humans, Middle Aged, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Sweden, Proportional Hazards Models, Survival Analysis

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