06 May 2014 In Cancer




BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies have suggested an inconsistent relationship between alcohol drinking and risk of all cancer mortality. As far as we know, no meta-analysis has been conducted to explore this issue. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We carried out a PubMed search to find relevant articles published before April 2012 in English. Categorical and dose-response meta-analyses were conducted to identify the impact of alcohol drinking on all cancer mortality. Potential sources of heterogeneity were detected by meta-regression and stratification analyses. Sensitivity and cumulative meta-analyses were also carried out. RESULTS: Eighteen independent cohort studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared with non/occasional drinkers, the pooled relative risks (RRs) were 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-0.94] for light, 1.02 (95% CI 0.99-1.06) for moderate, and 1.31 (95% CI 1.23-1.39) for heavy drinkers. Former drinkers presented a higher risk (RR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.15-1.50) than current drinkers (RR = 1.06, 95% CI 0.98-1.16). There was a J-shaped relationship between all cancer mortality and alcohol consumption in males but not in females. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis confirms the health hazards of heavy drinking (>/=50 g/day) and benefits of light drinking (</=12.5 g/day). Large-sample, well-designed, prospective epidemiological studies, especially on heavy drinking among women, should be developed in future.




06 May 2014 In Cancer




BACKGROUND: In the Bagnardi et al. (2001) meta-analysis, it was found that alcohol consumption increases the risk of stomach cancer (OR = 1.32 for heavy drinkers). However, it is unknown if drinking cessation reverses this alcohol-elevated risk. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed to provide the information for a meta-analysis where the dose-risk trend was estimated for years since drinking cessation and the risk of stomach cancer. A random effect generalised least squares model for trend estimation was used, employing study characteristics to control for heterogeneity. RESULTS: Nineteen observational studies were identified in the literature review, of which five studies quantified duration of cessation and risk of stomach cancer, giving a total of 1947 cancer cases. No significant effect of drinking cessation on the risk of stomach cancer could be found (OR = 0.99 CI: 0.97-1.02). CONCLUSIONS: This result should be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of studies in this area. Recent findings suggest a link between heavy drinking and stomach cancer, especially gastric noncardia, but not for moderate drinking. Since all but one of the included studies in this meta-analysis failed to control for consumption level, the current study could not test if the risk decline following drinking cessation differs between moderate and high consumers.




06 May 2014 In Cancer




Alcohol drinking is a known risk factor for laryngeal cancer. However, little information is available on the risk associated with light alcohol drinking. To address this issue, we conducted a meta-analysis using two methods: (i) random-effects models with reconstruction of alcohol consumption categories and calculation of risk estimates associated with predefined consumption levels using Hamling method and (ii) random-effects meta-regression models. The PubMed database was searched for all case-control or cohort studies published in the English language on the association between alcohol consumption and risk of laryngeal cancer. Forty studies (38 case-control, 2 cohort) reporting on at least three levels of consumption were included. Overall, alcohol drinking versus non-drinking was associated with an approximately 2-fold increase in risk of laryngeal cancer (RR=1.90; 95% CI: 1.59-2.28). While light alcohol drinking (>/=1 drink/day) did not show any significant association with risk of laryngeal cancer (12 studies. RR=0.88; 95% CI: 0.71-1.08), moderate drinking (>1 to <4drinks/day) was associated with a 1.5-fold increase in risk (35 studies. RR=1.47; 95% CI: 1.25-1.72) and heavy drinking (4drinks/day) was associated with a 2.5-fold increased risk (33 studies. RR=2.62; 95% CI: 2.13-3.23). Subgroup analyses for studies that adjusted for main potential confounding factors (age, sex, and tobacco use) and several further subgroup analyses showed similar results, which suggest the robustness of the results.




06 May 2014 In Cancer




Quantification of the association between alcohol drinking and risk of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) is an open issue, particularly among light alcohol drinkers, never-smokers, and Asian populations, in which some high-risk polymorphisms in alcohol metabolizing genes are more prevalent. To address these issues, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using 40 case-control and 13 cohort studies that reported on the risk associated with alcohol drinking for at least 3 levels of consumption. In studies adjusted for age, sex, and tobacco smoking, the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for the association between light alcohol drinking (12.5-<50g/d) and 5.54 (3.92-7.28) for high alcohol intake (>/=50g/d); the RRs were slightly higher in non-Asian populations. In prospective studies, the RR (95% CI) was 1.35 (0.92-1.98) for light, 2.15 (1.55-2.98) for moderate, and 3.35 (2.06-5.46) for high alcohol intakes; light drinking showed an association with ESCC in Asia (5 studies) but not in other regions (3 studies). Among never-smokers (9 studies), the RR (95% CI) was 0.74 (0.47-1.16) for light, 1.54 (1.09-2.17) for moderate, and 3.09 (1.75-5.46) for high intakes. This meta-analysis further corroborates the association of moderate and high alcohol intake with risk of ESCC and provides risk estimates based on multiple prospective studies. Light alcohol intake appears to be associated to ESCC mainly in studies in Asia, which suggests a possible role of genetic susceptibility factors.




Page 45 of 60

Contact us

We love your feedback. Get in touch with us.

  • Tel: +32 (0)2 230 99 70
  • Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


The authors have taken reasonable care in ensuring the accuracy of the information herein at the time of publication and are not responsible for any errors or omissions. Read more on our disclaimer and Privacy Policy.