Use of Hypnotics and Risk of Esophagus Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Nuris Torres Argota1, Hamilton Roberto Moreira de Oliveira Carrico2, Helen Beckert3, Andressa Cardoso4, Francisco Jose Germano Hennemann5, Barbara Antonia Talah6, Julia Mello7, Francisco de Moraes8
1Santa Casa de Miseric Hospital in Porto Alegre, 2University of Southern Santa Catarina, 3Federal University Of Paraná, 4July Nine University, 5University of Taubaté., 6Pontifical Catholic University of Paraná, 7Pontifical Catholic University of São Paulo, 8Federal University of Para
Objective:

Quantify the magnitude of the use of hypnotics to present esophagus cancer.


Background:

Hypnotic medications are widely used to treat insomnia and other sleep disorders. However, there is a risk of developing secondary diseases, especially cancer of the esophagus and gastrointestinal tract, which has not yet been fully elucidated.


Design/Methods:

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science were searched for RCTs comparing the use of hypnotics for the development of esophageal cancer. A random-effects model was employed to check the odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Statistical analysis was performed using R software 4.3.1.


Results:

A total of 6 studies were included in this meta-analysis, 3 cohorts and 3 case-control, and the hypnotics used were benzodiazepines and zolpidem. Of the total number of patients, 4364 used benzodiazepine and 27963 were part of the control group; while 1047 used Zolpidem, with 2924 control cases. The average follow-up period  and age were approximately 12 ± 2 years and 51.7 ± 65 years. Comparing the results between the studies, there is a risk of esophagus cancer of those patients that used hypnotics (OR 1.3498; 95% Cl 1.06 - 1.70) 



Conclusions:

In this meta-analysis of 6 studies, the use of hypnotics was associated with an increased incidence of esophageal cancer. However, the limited number of studies and the lack of sub-groups information suggest the need for studies in the future.




10.1212/WNL.0000000000211061
Disclaimer: Abstracts were not reviewed by Neurology® and do not reflect the views of Neurology® editors or staff.