Table 2.

Summary statistics for the association between H. Pylori and esophageal adenocarcinoma

	Number of studies	Q-statistic 1	P-value2	I2 (%) 3	Random effects OR (95% CI)	Fixed effects OR (95% CI)
H. pylori (840/2890)4
All studies	13	14.19	0.29	15	0.56 (0.46 – 0.68)	0.55 (0.47 – 0.66)
Large studies (SE < 0.5)	8	9.64	0.21	27	0.58 (0.47 – 0.73)	0.57 (0.48 – 0.68)
Population-based studies	6	7.32	0.20	32	0.58 (0.43 – 0.76)	0.57 (0.46 – 0.71)
Western studies	12	13.28	0.28	17	0.57 (0.47 – 0.70)	0.56 (0.47 – 0.67)
Eastern studies	1	-	-	0	0.32 (0.10 – 1.02)	0.32 (0.10 – 1.02)
Studies used serological tests	10	10.03	0.35	10	0.59 (0.48 – 0.73)	0.56 (0.47 – 0.67)
Studies with age-matched controls	8	9.17	0.24	24	0.58 (0.46 – 0.75)	0.58 (0.47 – 0.71)
Studies that required Barrett’s esophagus for EAC diagnosis	5	3.77	0.44	0	0.44 (0.33 – 0.58)	0.43 (0.33 – 0.56)
Adjusted results	7	13.25	0.04	55	0.50 (0.34 – 0.74)	0.52 (0.41 – 0.66)
H. pylori (the broader definition)5	13	16.60	0.17	28	0.56 (0.45 – 0.69)	0.57 (0.46 – 0.71)
CagA-negative strains6	5	1.64	0.80	0	1.08 (0.76 – 1.53)	1.07 (0.75 – 1.52)
CagA-positive strains7	5	4.78	0.31	16	0.41 (0.28 – 0.62)	0.40 (0.28 – 0.56)

¹⁾Chi-square Q-statistic for homogeneity in random effects model;

²⁾P- value for the Q-statistic in random effects model;

³⁾Higgins I² statistic for heterogeneity in random effects model;

⁴⁾Being positive for antibodies against whole-cell or being positive for H. pylori in invasive tests; numbers inside parenthesis refer to number of cases/controls;

⁵⁾Being positive for antibodies against whole-cell or CagA, or positive for H. pylori in invasive tests;

⁶⁾This row compares subjects with CagA-negative strains versus those who are H. pylori-negative;

⁷⁾This row compares subjects with CagA-positive strains versus those who are H. pylori-negative