Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2021 Jan 6;16(1):e0244285. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244285

Opioid use as a potential risk factor for pancreatic cancer in the United States: An analysis of state and national level databases

Usman Barlass 1,#, Ameya Deshmukh 2,#, Todd Beck 3, Faraz Bishehsari 1,*
Editor: Ram K Raghavan4
PMCID: PMC7787381  PMID: 33406096

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer (PC) rate is increasing in the U.S. The use of prescription and illicit opioids has continued to rise nationally in recent years as well. Opioids have been shown to have a deleterious effect on multiple types of cancer with recent data suggesting opium use as a risk factor for PC. Using national databases, we tested whether opioid usage pattern over time could explain the state and national-based variations in PC rates in the U.S. Opioid death rate (as a surrogate for prescription and illicit opioid use) was extracted from the CDCs Wonder online data through the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program. Incidence of pancreatic cancer was retrieved from the online CDCs data base gathered from the U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. Prevalence of obesity, tobacco and alcohol use was collected from Behavioral risk factor surveillance system. Mixed-effects regression models were used to test the association between levels of PC rate and opioid death/use rates during the years 1999–2016. A rise in PC was seen over time at the national and state levels. Similarly, the opioid death rates increased over time. Among other potential PC risk factors, only obesity prevalence showed an increase during the study period. A state’s opioid death rate at 4 years prior significantly predicted initial incidence of PC (β = 0.1848, p<0.0001) and had a significant effect on the estimated annual change in the rate of PC (β = -.0193,p<0.0001). Opioid use may be an un-identified risk factor contributing to the increasing incidence of PC in the U.S. These novel findings need to be verified by population-based studies.

Introduction

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is currently the third leading cause of cancer related mortality in the United States (U.S) [1]. The five year survival rate for PC remains dismal (~10%), partly due to asymptomatic progression of the disease with a majority (~85%) of the patients having non-surgically resectable disease at the time of diagnosis [2]. More alarming is the ongoing increase in the PC incidence which will place the disease as the second cause of cancer mortality by the end of this decade [3]. Discovering risk factors contributing to PC can aid with identifying high risk groups that would benefit from implementation of preventive and possibly screening strategies, which could help in reduction of the disease burden and/or early diagnosis.

While the established risk factors for PC including genetic predisposition syndromes and chronic pancreatitis (alcohol or non-alcohol causes) only account for a small portion of PC incident cases, the etiology for the majority of cases has remained unknown. Several factors associated with our lifestyle habits (e.g., smoking) have been proposed to modulate the risk of PC [1, 46]. Besides increasing obesity rates, exposure to a number of PC risk factors, such as smoking and alcohol, has been steady or even decreasing at the population level, contrary to the increase in the PC rates in the recent years. Therefore, novel factors may be at play.

Recent population based studies have suggested opium use to increase risk of PC in a dose dependent manner [7, 8]. While opium use is not a common recreational habit in the U.S., opioid use has been rising remarkably over the past decade. In fact, opioid misuse and overdose have evolved into a public health crisis. Approximately 70,000 drug overdose deaths were reported in 2017, 68% of which involved an opioid [9]. The use of prescription opioids for the management of chronic pain has increased remarkably with more than 191 million opioid prescriptions given to patients in the U.S in 2017. Not surprisingly, the opioid addiction rates among patients who are given opioid for chronic pain has increased with 29% of such patients misusing opioids, and 12% developing an opioid use disorder [10].

Using national datasets, we aimed to evaluate whether the trend in the burden of opioid usage could explain the trend in PC at the national and state levels overtime.

Methods

Data collection

Pancreatic cancer incidence rates (age adjusted to the 2000 US standard population) from 1999 to 2016 for all 50 states and the District of Columbia and nationally were obtained from the CDC’s U.S Cancer Statistics database (accessed November, 2020) [11]. These data were retrieved from the CDC’s publicly available national database through their behavioral risk factor surveillance system (BRFSS) (S1S5 Tables). Upper and lower 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were retrieved for each risk factor from the existing datasets.

Opioid death rate data originated from the CDC wonder online database (released 2018) and retrieved through the Kaiser Family Foundation analysis (accessed November, 2020) [12]. Opioid death rate was used as a surrogate marker for overall opioid use to account for both prescription and illicit opioid use. Data are from the Multiple Cause of Death Files, 1999–2018, through the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program, as compiled from data provided by the 57 vital statistics jurisdictions. Drug overdose deaths were classified using the International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision (ICD-10). All data was fully anonymized before it was accessed.

In order to correct for other possible proposed risk factors for PC, current cigarette smoking prevalence (1999 to 2017), obesity prevalence (1999 to 2018) and alcohol use prevalence (1999 to 2018) were also collected [13]. Obesity was defined as body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30.0, calculated from self-reported weight and height (weight [kg]/ height [m2]). Pregnant women and respondents reporting weight < 50 pounds or ≥ 650 pounds; height < 3 feet or ≥ 8 feet; or BMI: <12 or ≥ 100 were excluded. Alcohol use prevalence was determined from adults who have consumed at least one alcoholic beverage in the past 30 days. All risk factors were based on using the full population (S1S5 Tables)

Each variable data point at a specific year was linked to the PC rate four years later to account for the least potential lag time for the disease development from the time of exposure [14].

To illustrate trends, incidence rates and prevalence were plotted for each individual state from 1999 to 2016.

Statistical analysis

Linear mixed-effects models allowing for state specific slopes and intercepts were used to assess the unadjusted time trends over the length of the study period in PC, opioid death rate, obesity, alcohol use and cigarette use. A mixed-effects regression model was then used to examine the multivariate longitudinal association between the change of pancreatic cancer incidence rates and the risk factors included in this study for the years 1999–2016 [15]. This hierarchical model provides a way to estimate covariate effects while controlling for variability in the form of state-specific random effects. Time (years) since 1999 was used to measure annual change and an interaction between time and each risk factor tested for whether the risk factor modified the rate of change. All models used two sided tests at α = 0.05 to determine significance.

Additionally, another linear mixed effects model was created using the log transformed opioid death rate.

Results

From 1999–2016, there were 700,300 incident cases of pancreatic cancer in the United States. Concurrently, 351,630 opioid overdose deaths occurred during this same period [16].

There were marked differences in the distribution of pancreatic cancer incidence and opioid death rates among the states. However, both incidence and death rates increased from 1999 to 2016 in most states (Figs 1 and 2, S1 Fig). The PC incidence rate in the average state increased at an unadjusted rate of 0.137 percentage points per year from 1999 to 2016 (Table 1).

Fig 1.

Fig 1

Incidence of pancreatic cancer (1999 and 2016), U.S Cancer Statistics Working group, and opioid death rate by state (1999 and 2016), CDC Wonder database (A) Pancreatic cancer incidence visualization by state in 1999, (B) Pancreatic cancer incidence visualization by state in 2016(C) Opioid death rate visualization by state in 1999, (D) Opioid death rate visualization by state in 2016, Reprinted from [MapChart.net] under a CC BY license, with permission from [Minas Giannekas], original copyright [2014].

Fig 2.

Fig 2

(A) Incidence rate of pancreatic cancer over time per 100,000 people, State incidence rate of pancreatic cancer through the years 1999 to 2016, (B) Incidence rate of opioid death overtime per 100,000 people, State incidence rate of opioid death through the years 1999 to 2016, (C) A state with an opioid death rate in the 25th percentile in 1999 had an annual increase in PC that was 34 percent faster than a state at the median opioid death rate and 3.3 times faster than a state with an opioid death rate in the 75th percentile.

Table 1. Annual change of PC rate and risk factors.

Annual Change of PC and Risk Factors Estimate Confidence Interval (95%)
Pancreatic cancer rate 0.137 0.119, 0.155
Opioid death rate 0.546 0.438, 0.653
Obesity prevalence 0.605 0.571, 0.639
Alcohol prevalence -0.0003 -0.075, 0.074
Cigarette use prevalence -0.306 -0.333, -0.279

Among contributing factors evaluated at a state level, the opioid death rate increased significantly over the study period (Fig 2B, Beta β = .546, P-value < 0.0001). We also observed an increase in obesity prevalence (S3A Fig, Beta β = .605, P-value < 0.0001). We observed no increase or decrease in alcohol prevalence (S3B Fig) (β = -0.0003, P-value 0.994). Cigarette use prevalence decreased significantly over time (S3C Fig) (β = -0.306, P-value < 0.0001). Values for each risk factor by state with confidence intervals are provided in the S1S5 Tables. Data plotted for each of these variables at a national level is shown in S2 Fig.

We employed a mixed-effects regression model to provide a multivariate analysis of the longitudinal associations between the potential risk factors (opioid use, obesity, alcohol and smoking) and the change in incidence rates of pancreatic cancer. This statistical model allows us to observe the subtle changes in the magnitude of the effects of opioid death rate and obesity through time as PC rates are modestly increasing when compared to infectious diseases with dramatic epidemiological drifts. This type of analysis uses opioid death rate over time as the predictor and change in PC rate over time as the outcome.

Results of the mixed effect model are presented in Table 2. The risk factor adjusted PC rate increased over time by an average of 0.108 percentage points per year. The cross-sectional rate of PC was significantly related to the 4-year lagged opioid death rate (β = 0.185, p<0.0001), while this effect got smaller over time, it still retained a statistically significant association with increasing PC rates. (β = -.019, p<0.0001). Levels of alcohol use were also associated with higher rates of PC (β = 0.025, p = 0.007). Obesity rate was not associated with rate of PC (β = 0.023, p = 0.493), nor degree of change of PC rates (β = 0.002, p = 0.404). However, there was a significant interaction between opioid death rate and obesity prevalence (β = 0.017, p = 0.0002). Indicating rates of PC were higher in states with elevated levels of both obesity and opioid usage 4 years prior. As the opioid death rates overtime was not normally distributed, we also ran our model using the log transformed opioid death rate. As shown in the S6 Table, the output of the model remained unchanged with the log transformed opioid death rate being statistically significantly associated with the pancreatic cancer incidence rate.

Table 2. Mixed effects regression model analysis results using risk factors with a four year delay to account for the development of pro-cancerous changes.

Four-year lagged risk factors Estimate Standard Error P-Value
Opioid death rate 0.185 0.047 < .0001
Obesity prevalence 0.023 0.033 0.493
Alcohol prevalence 0.025 0.009 0.007
Cigarette use prevalence -0.014 0.018 0.429
Time 0.108 0.021 < .0001
Interactions with risk factors with time* Estimate Standard Error P-Value
Opioid death rate* -0.019 0.004 < .0001
Obesity prevalence* 0.002 0.002 0.404
Interaction between opioid death rate and obesity prevalence 0.017 0.004 0.0002

* Denotes that this variable interacted with time in the statistical model.

To address how changes in opioid death rates were associated with changes in pancreatic cancer rates, we examined the interaction of the opioid death rate with PC rates over time in states with varying level of opioid death rate at the beginning of the study (Fig 2C). Although the overall trend in PC rates is increasing across the states, the rate of the increase is larger for those states starting at lower opioid levels and lower for those that started with higher levels of opioid usage (Fig 2C).

Discussion

Our results indicate opioid usage, estimated by opioid death rates may partially explain the uptrend of PC rates in the U.S. at the national as well as the state levels over time (Fig 2 and S1 Fig). These findings suggest that opioids use may be a novel risk factor for PC, a finding that needs further studies. Once confirmed, implications of the opioids on PC development are clinically significant given the widespread opioid usage in the country. Furthermore, opioids are widely used for pain management in pancreatitis, an established precursor to PC [17, 18] as well as in the cancer itself [19].

We confirmed the increase in the PC rates over time with the majority of the states showing an uptrend in the disease rates over the period of our study (16 years). Opioid use remained a significant predictor to the PC rates although its overall effect became weaker over time, suggesting a ceiling effect. This is supported by our observation that the most increase in PC rates over time occurred in the states that initially had the lowest opioid death rates and showed a significant increase in this opioid index by time (Fig 2). This deeper analysis of lower and upper percentile states of opioid death rate and PC rate assists in taking a more nuanced and complex examination of why the effects of opioid death rate on PC rate are decreasing annually despite being a statistically significant predictor.

The association of obesity prevalence and the opioid index in the national databases may be explained by the observation that opioid usage is associated with a poorer lifestyle in general [20]. Such populations could be exposed to other conditions and comorbidities associated with a poor lifestyle that did not enter our model which is a subject of further studies. As suggested by the opposite trend in cigarette use prevalence and PC rates over time in U.S, cigarette use was not associated with PC rate in our analysis.

Opioids and its derivatives are widely used for the management of pain in PC. A large retrospective study found a negative correlation between opioid usage and survival time in patients with unresectable tumors [3]. Population based studies from an area in Iran with high opium consumption rate proposed opium to increase risk of PC [7, 8]. Furthermore a recent post hoc analysis of two randomized controlled trials of patients with advanced cancers (including pancreatic cancer), revealed that those treated frequently with an opioid antagonist had significantly improved overall survival compared to placebo [21].

Mechanistically, opioids as a class of drugs, have been previously studied to have possible carcinogenicity in cancers other than PC [22]. Multiple studies have shown that opioids have a potential to promote cancer progression and metastases in multiple different types of cancers including breast, prostate, lung, esophageal and hepatocellular cancer by various mechanisms including activation of the mTOR pathway, promoting angiogenesis and even promoting epithelial to mesenchymal transition [23]. In addition opioids have been shown to alter the gut microbiome [24] which in turn has been shown to modulate pancreatic carcinogenesis [25]. With these mounting data, the impact of opioids on pancreatic cancer formation and/or progression certainly needs to be further studied.

Using state-based datasets over 16 years, our data suggest opioid usage as a potential risk factor for pancreatic cancer. We used the publicly available data from the CDCs robust reporting system. However, we acknowledge limitations of our analysis. Opioid death rate was used a surrogate for overall opioid use. While prescription opioid use increased in the mid to late 1990s, nonmedical opioid use also increased significantly in the early 2000s and constitutes a large proportion of overall opioid use [26]. Hence, we believe, unlike the opioid prescription rates that miss out the illicit and illegal usage, the opioid death rate index accounts for the pattern of both prescription as well as illicit opioid use across the states. The tested variables showed high variabilities among the fifty states with some missing values per the state-year. We used a mixed effects model to analyze repeated-measures data over time which has several advantages including accounting for the initial levels of cancer rate as sources of random variability and allows for variation in number of observations across the groups (e.g., the states), allowing all possible data to be used. BRFSS data on obesity (based on height and weight) are self-reported and as such could be subject to misreporting. However, this data could be utilized for estimating trends over time reliably since the same source of self-reported data was consistently used for the trend calculations during the study period here. Despite the limitations of the CDC databases, they are currently the most reliable datasets at our disposal for analyzing the interactions between opioid use and pancreatic cancer on a national scale. We used the values with 95% confidence intervals from these datasets; while we are not able to independently ascertain these values, using multiple data points overtime, we were able to find the interplay between the increasing pancreatic cancer rates in relation to the increase in opioid use.

We acknowledge that our study is subject to ecological limitations; association between opioid usage and pancreatic cancer rates in our study is observed at group (states and national) levels and may not be directly extrapolatable to the individual level. In the absence of longitudinal dataset that reliably register long-term outcomes in opioid users, our observation needs to be further tested in future cohorts where individual-level data on opioid consumption and long-term outcome is available. However, we corrected in our analysis for any other known confounding factors that could contribute to the risk of pancreatic cancer in our examined populations.

In summary, our analysis of state-based databases suggests that opioid usage pattern may explain the trend of increased pancreatic cancer over time. Opioids as a novel risk factor pancreatic cancer needs to be confirmed in population-based studies.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Pancreatic cancer incidence rate by state, United States cancer statistics: Data visualizations.

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Opioid death rate by state, United States cancer statistics: Data visualizations.

(DOCX)

S3 Table. Obesity prevalence by state (%), Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

(DOCX)

S4 Table. Alcohol use prevalence by state (%), Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

(DOCX)

S5 Table. Cigarette use by state (%), Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

(DOCX)

S6 Table. Mixed effects regression model using log transformed opioid death rate.

(DOCX)

S1 Fig

(A) Incidence rate of pancreatic cancer over time per 100,000 people, National incidence rate of pancreatic cancer through the years 1999 to 2016, (B) Incidence rate of opioid death overtime per 100,000 people, National incidence rate of opioid death rate through the years 1999 to 2016.

(TIF)

S2 Fig

(A) National prevalence of obesity through the years 1999 to 2018, (B) National prevalence (%) of alcohol use through the years 1999 to 2018, (C) National prevalence (%) of tobacco use through the years 1999 to 2017.

(TIF)

S3 Fig

(A) State prevalence of obesity overtime, Prevalence of obesity by state through the years 1999 to 2018, (B) Prevalence of alcohol use by state through the years 1999 to 2018, (C) Prevalence of tobacco use by state through the years 1999 to 2017.

(TIF)

Abbreviations

PC

Pancreatic Cancer

U.S

United States

CDC

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

Data Availability

All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.

Funding Statement

F.B. is supported by grants from the Rush Translational Sciences Consortium/Swim Across America Organization, Brinson Foundation, National Institutes of Health grant AA025387 and Institute for Translational Medicine (ITM), the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (grant No. 5UL1TR002389–02) that funds the ITM. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Khalaf N., El-Serag H.B., Abrams H.R., Thrift A.P., Burden of Pancreatic Cancer-From Epidemiology to Practice, Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, (2020). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Kleeff J., Korc M., Apte M., La Vecchia C., Johnson C.D., Biankin A.V., et al. Pancreatic cancer, Nat Rev Dis Primers, 2 (2016) 16022 10.1038/nrdp.2016.22 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Oh T.K., Do S.H., Yoon Y.S., Song I.A., Association Between Opioid Use and Survival Time in Patients With Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: 10 Years of Clinical Experience, Pancreas, 47 (2018) 837–842. 10.1097/MPA.0000000000001094 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Hidalgo M., Pancreatic cancer, N Engl J Med, 362 (2010) 1605–1617. 10.1056/NEJMra0901557 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Korc M., Jeon C.Y., Edderkaoui M., Pandol S.J., Petrov M.S., D. Consortium for the Study of Chronic Pancreatitis, C. Pancreatic, Tobacco and alcohol as risk factors for pancreatic cancer, Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol, 31 (2017) 529–536. 10.1016/j.bpg.2017.09.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Ryan D.P., Hong T.S., Bardeesy N., Pancreatic adenocarcinoma, N Engl J Med, 371 (2014) 1039–1049. 10.1056/NEJMra1404198 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Moossavi S., Mohamadnejad M., Pourshams A., Poustchi H., Islami F., Sharafkhah M., et al. Opium Use and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer: A Prospective Cohort Study, Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev, 27 (2018) 268–273. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0592 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Shakeri R., Kamangar F., Mohamadnejad M., Tabrizi R., Zamani F., Mohamadkhani A., et al. Opium use, cigarette smoking, and alcohol consumption in relation to pancreatic cancer, Medicine (Baltimore), 95 (2016) e3922 10.1097/MD.0000000000003922 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Scholl L., Seth P., Kariisa M., Wilson N., Baldwin G., Drug and Opioid-Involved Overdose Deaths—United States, 2013–2017, MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep, 67 (2018) 1419–1427. 10.15585/mmwr.mm675152e1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Vowles K.E., McEntee M.L., Julnes P.S., Frohe T., Ney J.P., van der Goes D.N., Rates of opioid misuse, abuse, and addiction in chronic pain: a systematic review and data synthesis, Pain, 156 (2015) 569–576. 10.1097/01.j.pain.0000460357.01998.f1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.C.f.D.C.a.P.a.N.C.I. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Cancer Statistics Working Group. U.S. Cancer Statistics Data Visualizations Tool, 2019, June.
  • 12.N.C.f.H.S. Kaiser Family Foundation analysis of Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Multiple Cause of Death 1999–2018 on CDC WONDER Online Database, 2020
  • 13.N.C.f.C.D.P.a.H.P. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Division of Population Health, BRFSS Prevalence & Trends Data.
  • 14.Chari S.T., Kelly K., Hollingsworth M.A., Thayer S.P., Ahlquist D.A., Andersen D.K., et al. Early detection of sporadic pancreatic cancer: summative review, Pancreas, 44 (2015) 693–712. 10.1097/MPA.0000000000000368 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Laird N.M., Ware J.H., Random-effects models for longitudinal data, Biometrics, 38 (1982) 963–974. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.S.L. Seth P, Rudd RA, Bacon S, Overdose Deaths Involving Opioids, Cocaine, and Psychostimulants—United States, MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2018;67:349–358, 2015–2016. 10.15585/mmwr.mm6712a1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Nusrat S., Yadav D., Bielefeldt K., Pain and opioid use in chronic pancreatitis, Pancreas, 41 (2012) 264–270. 10.1097/MPA.0b013e318224056f [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Wu B.U., Butler R.K., Chen W., Factors Associated With Opioid Use in Patients Hospitalized for Acute Pancreatitis, JAMA Netw Open, 2 (2019) e191827 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.1827 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Lahoud M.J., Kourie H.R., Antoun J., El Osta L., Ghosn M., Road map for pain management in pancreatic cancer: A review, World J Gastrointest Oncol, 8 (2016) 599–606. 10.4251/wjgo.v8.i8.599 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.N.I.o.D. Abuse, Addressing the Opioid Crisis Means Confronting Socioeconomic Disparities, (October 25, 2017).
  • 21.Janku F., Johnson L.K., Karp D.D., Atkins J.T., Singleton P.A., Moss J., Treatment with methylnaltrexone is associated with increased survival in patients with advanced cancer, Ann Oncol, 27 (2016) 2032–2038. 10.1093/annonc/mdw317 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Li J.H., Lin L.F., Genetic toxicology of abused drugs: a brief review, Mutagenesis, 13 (1998) 557–565. 10.1093/mutage/13.6.557 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Singleton P.A., Moss J., Karp D.D., Atkins J.T., Janku F., The mu opioid receptor: A new target for cancer therapy?, Cancer, 121 (2015) 2681–2688. 10.1002/cncr.29460 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Wang F., Roy S., Gut Homeostasis, Microbial Dysbiosis, and Opioids, Toxicol Pathol, 45 (2017) 150–156. 10.1177/0192623316679898 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Vitiello G.A., Cohen D.J., Miller G., Harnessing the Microbiome for Pancreatic Cancer Immunotherapy, Trends Cancer, 5 (2019) 670–676. 10.1016/j.trecan.2019.10.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Phillips JK F.M., Bonnie RJ, Trends in Opioid Use, Harms, and Treatment, Pain Management and the Opioid Epidemic: Balancing Societal and Individual Benefits and Risks of Prescription Opioid Use, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; Health and Medicine Division; Board on Health Sciences Policy; Committee on Pain Management and Regulatory Strategies to Address Prescription Opioid Abuse, National Academies Press (US), July 13 2017 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Ram K Raghavan

22 Sep 2020

PONE-D-20-20071

Opioid use as a potential contributing factor to the rise of pancreatic cancer; an analysis of state and national level databases from the United States

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Bishehsari,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Nov 06 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Ram K. Raghavan

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. In your ethics statement in the Methods section and in the online submission form, please confirm that all data were fully anonymized before you accessed them.

3. Please include the date(s) on which you accessed the database(s) or record(s) to obtain the data used in your study.

4.PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

5. Please include your tables as part of your main manuscript and remove the individual files. Please note that supplementary tables (should remain/ be uploaded) as separate "supporting information" files

6.We note that [Figure(s) 1] in your submission contain [map/satellite] images which may be copyrighted. All PLOS content is published under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which means that the manuscript, images, and Supporting Information files will be freely available online, and any third party is permitted to access, download, copy, distribute, and use these materials in any way, even commercially, with proper attribution. For these reasons, we cannot publish previously copyrighted maps or satellite images created using proprietary data, such as Google software (Google Maps, Street View, and Earth). For more information, see our copyright guidelines: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/licenses-and-copyright.

We require you to either (1) present written permission from the copyright holder to publish these figures specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license, or (2) remove the figures from your submission:

1.    You may seek permission from the original copyright holder of Figure(s) [1] to publish the content specifically under the CC BY 4.0 license. 

We recommend that you contact the original copyright holder with the Content Permission Form (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=7c09/content-permission-form.pdf) and the following text:

“I request permission for the open-access journal PLOS ONE to publish XXX under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CCAL) CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Please be aware that this license allows unrestricted use and distribution, even commercially, by third parties. Please reply and provide explicit written permission to publish XXX under a CC BY license and complete the attached form.”

Please upload the completed Content Permission Form or other proof of granted permissions as an "Other" file with your submission.

In the figure caption of the copyrighted figure, please include the following text: “Reprinted from [ref] under a CC BY license, with permission from [name of publisher], original copyright [original copyright year].”

2.    If you are unable to obtain permission from the original copyright holder to publish these figures under the CC BY 4.0 license or if the copyright holder’s requirements are incompatible with the CC BY 4.0 license, please either i) remove the figure or ii) supply a replacement figure that complies with the CC BY 4.0 license. Please check copyright information on all replacement figures and update the figure caption with source information. If applicable, please specify in the figure caption text when a figure is similar but not identical to the original image and is therefore for illustrative purposes only.

The following resources for replacing copyrighted map figures may be helpful:

USGS National Map Viewer (public domain): http://viewer.nationalmap.gov/viewer/

The Gateway to Astronaut Photography of Earth (public domain): http://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/sseop/clickmap/

Maps at the CIA (public domain): https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/index.html and https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/cia-maps-publications/index.html

NASA Earth Observatory (public domain): http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/

Landsat: http://landsat.visibleearth.nasa.gov/

USGS EROS (Earth Resources Observatory and Science (EROS) Center) (public domain): http://eros.usgs.gov/#

Natural Earth (public domain): http://www.naturalearthdata.com/

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The authors present results of a study using state and national level databases to assess the association between opioid use and pancreatic cancer. Using mixed effects models and state level data across 16 years of observation, authors find that opioid death rates are associated with incident pancreatic cancer rates 4 years later as well as change over time in the incident pancreatic cancer rates. They conclude that opioid use may account for some of the increase in pancreatic cancer. The manuscript will be strengthened if the authors consider the following points.

1. Authors are using estimated values from a variety of sources (and include 95% confidence intervals in the supplemental tables). Did the authors use the uncertainty in these values in any way in their analyses? At least some mention of this as a limitation would be good.

2. Were the assumptions of normality met for the outcomes evaluated with the mixed effects regression model? I am wondering about the opioid death rates in particular.

3. In the results, authors interpret the multivariate model results and in particular mention that obesity rate was not associated with the rate of pancreatic cancer. However, there is an interaction in the model (between obesity rate and opioid death rate), which makes the interpretation of the main effect not as straight forward. Authors should clarify their interpretation. Also, it is not clear from the table whether this interaction was an interaction with time. The coefficient in the text differs slightly than that in the table, so that should be corrected. The sentence in the text reporting that interaction and the sentence following it likely should be combined (as the last sentence is an incomplete sentence).

4. The authors used lagged risk factors to predict the rates of pancreatic cancer. Did authors consider assessing how change in opioid death rates were associated with change in pancreatic cancer rates?

5. Do the authors have any comments about the limitations of ecologic analyses in the context of their question?

Minor points:

1. In the abstract, the authors give the result of how the opioid death rate predicted incident pancreatic cancer. Authors might want to clarify here that they are predicting incident pancreatic cancer 4 years later. Also, in the next line, authors talk about the significant effect on the estimated annual change. The earlier sentence refers to the initial level of a state's opioid death rate, but they appear to use the time-varying 4-year lagged variable, so the effect on change over time is not restricted to just the initial level.

2. Under Data collection: "This data was" should be "These data were" and authors refer to Tables 1-5, but I think they mean Supplemental Tables 1-5. ("this data" also appears in the Discussion section and should "these data").

3. Figure 1: Panels C and D use the same colors, but they have different meanings. Since authors likely want readers to visually compare the two graphs to see the changes in opioid death rates, authors should consider having the same rate categories and colors (where applicable) and then have additional categories/colors to more easily see the differences.

Reviewer #2: the highlighted text should be edited and rewrite. also potential ecologic fallacy is one of the limitations of the current study that should be addressed in the discussion. figures in the text had not good resolution.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

Attachment

Submitted filename: PONE-D-20-20071_reviewer (1).pdf

PLoS One. 2021 Jan 6;16(1):e0244285. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244285.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


29 Oct 2020

We would like to thank the editor and reviewers for taking time to review our manuscript. We have responded to all feedback in our "Response to comments" document uploaded with the re-submission. Thank you.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Comments-Opiod-PDAC-Plos one.docx

Decision Letter 1

Ram K Raghavan

8 Dec 2020

Opioid use as a potential risk factor for pancreatic cancer in the United States; an analysis of state and national level databases

PONE-D-20-20071R1

Dear Dr. Bishehsari,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Ram K. Raghavan

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Acceptance letter

Ram K Raghavan

11 Dec 2020

PONE-D-20-20071R1

Opioid use as a potential risk factor for pancreatic cancer in the United States; an analysis of state and national level databases

Dear Dr. Bishehsari:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Ram K. Raghavan

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Pancreatic cancer incidence rate by state, United States cancer statistics: Data visualizations.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Table. Opioid death rate by state, United States cancer statistics: Data visualizations.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Table. Obesity prevalence by state (%), Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

    (DOCX)

    S4 Table. Alcohol use prevalence by state (%), Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

    (DOCX)

    S5 Table. Cigarette use by state (%), Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS).

    (DOCX)

    S6 Table. Mixed effects regression model using log transformed opioid death rate.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Fig

    (A) Incidence rate of pancreatic cancer over time per 100,000 people, National incidence rate of pancreatic cancer through the years 1999 to 2016, (B) Incidence rate of opioid death overtime per 100,000 people, National incidence rate of opioid death rate through the years 1999 to 2016.

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig

    (A) National prevalence of obesity through the years 1999 to 2018, (B) National prevalence (%) of alcohol use through the years 1999 to 2018, (C) National prevalence (%) of tobacco use through the years 1999 to 2017.

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig

    (A) State prevalence of obesity overtime, Prevalence of obesity by state through the years 1999 to 2018, (B) Prevalence of alcohol use by state through the years 1999 to 2018, (C) Prevalence of tobacco use by state through the years 1999 to 2017.

    (TIF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: PONE-D-20-20071_reviewer (1).pdf

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Comments-Opiod-PDAC-Plos one.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All relevant data are within the paper and its Supporting Information files.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES