Cohort studyindependent cross-checkabstract checked★ key study I-PPI-117 in-depth review

No extra cancer with ranitidine

Ranitidine Use and Incident Cancer in a Multinational Cohort.

Overview

You SC et al.. JAMA Netw Open 2023 · PMID 37725377 · DOI 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.33495

In 1.2 million people from 7 countries, ranitidine users developed cancer no more often than users of similar drugs.

Does the study support the specific claim? No · Methodological quality: high

Original publication

Plain-language summary

Study explained simply
What did the researchers want to find out?

Check cancer risk after ranitidine.

How was the study done?

Multinational cohort.

How many people, animals or samples were studied?

1,183,999 users.

What was actually found?

HR 1.04 (0.97-1.12).

How large was the observed effect?

0.27 per 1000 PY difference.

What do the results mean in everyday life?

Past ranitidine use is unlikely to have caused cancer.

What are the study's limitations?

Limited follow-up.

What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?

Contradicts '320,000 ng in the stomach' implications.

Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?

Includes Europe.

What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?

Cannot exclude very long-term effects.

Scientific in-depth review

1. Full reference

Authors
You SC et al.
Journal
JAMA Netw Open
Year
2023
Identifier
PMID 37725377 DOI 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.33495
Verification
verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-26 + Crossref 2026-10-26
Retracted
no
Corrections
none
Extent checked
abstract only
Conflicts of interest and funding

Non-US government support; COI not in abstract

2. Research question

Is ranitidine associated with higher cancer risk than other H2RAs?

3. Study design and population

Study design
Cohort study – Multinational new-user active-comparator cohort network (OHDSI; 11 databases)
Population

Adults without prior cancer using H2RAs >30 days

Country

USA, UK, Germany, Spain, France, South Korea, Taiwan

Period

1986-2020

Sample size

1,183,999 (909,168 ranitidine; 274,831 other H2RA)

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

1-year washout; no cancer history

4. Methods and endpoints

Exposure / intervention

Ranitidine

Comparator

Famotidine, lafutidine, nizatidine, roxatidine

Endpoints

Any cancer (excluding non-melanoma skin); 16 subtypes; mortality

Statistical methods

Large-scale propensity matching, negative-control calibration, random-effects meta-analysis

5. Actual results

Results

After matching: 15.92 vs 15.65 cancers per 1000 PY; calibrated HR 1.04 (0.97-1.12); no significant secondary outcome associations.

Absolute risks

Difference 0.27 per 1000 person-years (not significant)

Authors' conclusion

Ranitidine use was not associated with increased cancer risk compared with other H2RAs.

6. Strengths

  • Very large, multinational
  • Empirical calibration

7. Weaknesses

  • Follow-up length limited
  • Observational

8. Risk of bias

Orienting tool
ROBINS-E
Type of assessment
simplified assessment (abstract only)
Full formal assessment
no
Overall risk of bias
low
Rationale

Active comparator and calibration; residual bias small.

9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation

CI excludes >12% relative increase (stats/C-PPI-08_ranitidine.py).

10. Relevance to the specific claim

If ranitidine formed huge NDMA amounts in the stomach, a cancer excess would be expected; none was found.

11. Independent contrary findings

Long-latency cancers may need longer follow-up.

12. Transferability to Germany and Europe

Includes European databases.

13. Overall methodological judgement

Strong evidence against clinically relevant in-vivo NDMA formation.

Multidimensional assessment
Multidimensional assessment
Authenticity of the sourceverified
Methodological qualityhigh
Risk of biaslow
Precision of resultshigh
Directnessdirect
Reproducibilitypartly replicated
Consistency with the overall evidenceconsistent
Regional transferabilityhigh
Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive)not applicable

14. Open questions

Very long-term effects.

15. Linked fact checks