Meta-analysis reveals an association between acute pancreatitis and the risk of pancreatic cancer

Table 1 Demographics and characteristics of studies included in this meta-analysis

Ref.	Country	M/F ratio	Age, mean or median	Period of recruitment	PC cases/AP cases	AP verification	PC verification	Effect value and 95%CI
Cohort studies
Rijkers et al[20], 2017	Netherlands	1.19	58.0	2004-2007	5/731	Clinical evaluation	Clinical evaluation	SIR 1.1 (0.3-3.3)
Kirkegård et al[21], 20181	Denmark	1.21	55.8	1980-2013	937/41669	ICD code	ICD code	HR 2.02 (1.57-2.61)2
Pang et al[22], 20181	China	0.69	51.5	2004-2008	13/1066	ICD code	ICD code	HR 9.99 (3.20-31.16)2
Munigala et al[23], 20141	United States	13.29	57.0	1998-2000	86/5720	ICD code	ICD code	RR 1.05 (0.14-7.68)2
Chung et al[24], 20121	China	1.96	> 40	2000-2003	11/747	ICD code	ICD code	HR 9.10 (3.81-21.76)
Ekbom et al[25], 1994	Sweden	1.19	55.6	1965-1983	NA/NA	ICD code	ICD code	SIR 0.9 (0.2-2.5)2
Sadr-Azodi et al[10], 20181	Sweden	1.06	62.0	1997-2013	536/49749	ICD code	ICD code	HR 1.24 (0.68-2.25)2
Goldacre et al[26], 20081	Britain	0.88	NA	1963-1999	91/24993	ICD code	ICD code	RR 5.70 (4.54-7.08)
Karlson et al[14], 19971	Sweden	1.49	54.5	1965-1983	152/24753	ICD code	ICD code	SIR 1.6 (1.3-2.0)2
Case-control studies
Bansal et al[27], 19951	United States	NA	57.0	1988-1992	2639/64	ICD code	ICD code	OR 1.76 (1.28-2.41)
Duell et al[13], 20061	United States	NA	> 21	1995-1999	308/16	Self-reported (physician diagnosed)	Pathology+ physician reported	OR 6.4 (2.7-15)

¹Effect values in the study have matched/adjustment variables.

²Effect values are extracted from included studies according to the longest follow-up time. AP: Acute pancreatitis; CI: Confidence interval; F: Female; HR: Hazard ratio; ICD: International Classification of Diseases; M: Male; OR: Odds ratio; PC: Pancreatic cancer; RR: Relative risk; SIR: Standardized incidence ratio.

Table 2 Quality assessment of included studies in this meta-analysis

Ref.		Representativeness of the exposed cohort	Selection of the non-exposed cohort	Ascertainment of exposure	Outcome of interest was not present at start of study	Based on the design or analysis	Assessment of outcome	Follow-up long enough for outcomes to occur	Adequacy of follow-up of cohorts	OverallScore
Cohort studies	Rijkers et al[20], 2017	1	0	1	1	2	1	1	1	8
	Kirkegård et al[21], 2018	1	0	1	1	2	1	1	1	8
	Pang et al[22], 2018	1	1	1	1	2	1	1	1	9
	Munigala et al[23], 2014	1	0	1	1	2	1	1	1	8
	Chung et al[24], 2012	1	1	1	1	2	1	1	1	9
	Ekbom et al[25], 1994	1	0	1	1	2	1	1	1	8
	Sadr-Azodi et al[10], 2018	1	1	1	1	2	1	1	1	9
	Goldacre et al[26], 2008	1	1	1	1	2	0	1	1	8
	Karlson et al[14], 1997	1	0	1	1	2	1	1	1	8
Case-control studies	Bansal et al[27], 1995	1	1	1	1	2	1	1	0	8
	Duell et al[13], 2006	0	1	1	1	2	0	1	0	6