Biases Inherent in Studies of Coffee Consumption in Early Pregnancy and the Risks of Subsequent Events

Leviton, Alan

doi:10.20944/preprints201807.0467.v1

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 121 publications

(132 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, it is generally recognized by epidemiologists that, when asking mothers to recall what they may have ingested during pregnancy after giving birth to a child with a birth defect or disease, they will try to find a cause. For this reason, an alternative study design is for both the case and control populations to have adverse conditions manifested; otherwise, there is a high likelihood of recall bias [ 28 ]. Another stronger study design option would be a nested case-control design with prospective assessment of exposure.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Key Findings and Implications of a Recent Systematic Review of the Potential Adverse Effects of Caffeine Consumption in Healthy Adults, Pregnant Women, Adolescents, and Children

Doepker

Franke

Myers³

et al. 2018

Nutrients

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In 2016–2017, we conducted and published a systematic review on caffeine safety that set out to determine whether conclusions that were presented in the heavily cited Health Canada assessment, remain supported by more recent data. To that end, we reviewed data from 380 studies published between June 2001 and June 2015, which were identified from an initial batch of over 5000 articles through a stringent search and evaluation process. In the current paper, we use plain language to summarize our process and findings, with the intent of sharing additional context for broader reach to the general public. We addressed whether caffeine doses previously determined not to be associated with adverse effects by Health Canada (400 mg/day for healthy adults, 300 mg/day for pregnant women, 2.5 mg/kg body weight/day for adolescents and children, and 10 g/day for acute effects) remain appropriate for five outcome areas (acute toxicity, cardiovascular toxicity, bone & calcium effects, behavior, and development and reproduction) in healthy adults, pregnant women, adolescents, and children. We used a weight-of-evidence approach to draw conclusions for each of the five outcomes, as well as more specific endpoints within those outcomes, which considered study quality, consistency, level of adversity, and magnitude of response. In general, updated evidence confirms the levels of intake that were put forth by Health Canada in 2003 as not being associated with any adverse health effects, and our results support a shift in caffeine research from healthy to sensitive populations.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Key Findings and Implications of a Recent Systematic Review of the Potential Adverse Effects of Caffeine Consumption in Healthy Adults, Pregnant Women, Adolescents, and Children

Doepker

Franke

Myers³

et al. 2018

Nutrients

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…25,39,71 Furthermore, any association between caffeine and miscarriage is likely to be confounded by the fact that a healthy pregnancy is associated with nausea and vomiting (due to pregnancy hormones), which in turn may reduce caffeine consumption. 72 Our literature searches found that night shift work is associated with an increased risk of miscarriage (aOR 1•43;…”

Section: Lifestyle Risk Factorsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Miscarriage is generally defined as the loss of a pregnancy before viability. An estimated 23 million miscarriages occur every year worldwide, translating to 44 pregnancy losses each minute. The pooled risk of miscarriage is 15•3% (95% CI: 12•5% -18•7%) of all recognised pregnancies. The population prevalence of women with one miscarriage is 10•8% (95% CI 10•3% -11•4%), two miscarriages is 1•9% (95% CI 1•8% -2•1%) and three or more miscarriages is 0•7% (0•5% -0•8%).Risk factors for miscarriage include very young or older female age, older male age, very low or very high body mass index, black ethnicity, previous miscarriages, smoking, alcohol, stress levels, night shift working, air pollution and exposure to pesticides. The consequences of miscarriage are both physical, such as bleeding or infection, and psychological.Psychological consequences include increases in the risk of anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder and suicide. Miscarriage, and especially recurrent miscarriage, is also a sentinel risk marker for obstetric complications, including preterm birth, fetal growth restriction, placental abruption and stillbirth in future pregnancies, and a predictor of longer-term health problems, such as cardiovascular disease and venous thromboembolism.The costs of miscarriage affect individuals, healthcare systems and society at large. The short-term national economic cost of miscarriage is estimated to be £471 million per year in the United Kingdom. As recurrent miscarriage is a sentinel marker for various obstetric risks in future pregnancies, women should receive care in pre-conception and high-risk obstetric clinics. As psychological morbidity is common after pregnancy loss, effective screening instruments and treatment options for mental health consequences of miscarriage need to be available. We recommend that miscarriage data are gathered and reported to facilitate comparison of rates amongst countries, to accelerate research, and to improve patient care and policy development.

show abstract

“…Large twin studies conducted in northern European populations report shared genetic factors in explaining the co-occurrence of smoking and caffeine intake, including especially caffeine intake derived from coffee drinking [42]. Part of this may be due to the fact that coffee intake is counter-indicated in some medical conditions and this may be difficult to disentangle in cohort studies when the reasons for no/reduced coffee intake is not known [7,23,48]. Mechanistic studies suggest that a protective association between coffee intake and RCC is biologically plausible.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Coffee intake and trace element blood concentrations in association with renal cell cancer among smokers

Weinstein

Moore

et al. 2021

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Determine whether higher coffee intake may reduce the risk of renal cell cancer (RCC) associated with lead (Pb) and other heavy metals with known renal toxicity. Methods: We conducted a nested case-control study of male smokers (136 RCC cases and 304 controls) within the Alpha-Tocopherol, Beta-Carotene Cancer Prevention (ATBC) Study. Cases diagnosed with RCC at five or more years following cohort enrollment, were matched to controls on age (±7 years) and whole blood draw date (±30 days). Conditional logistic regression (using two-sided tests) was used to test for main effects and additive models of effect modification. Results: After a mean follow-up of 16.3 years, coffee consumption was not significantly associated with renal cell cancer risk, when adjusting for blood concentrations of Cd, Hg and Pb and RCC risk factors (age, smoking, BMI, and systolic blood pressure) (p-trend, 0.134). The association with above median blood Pb and RCC (HR = 1.69, 95% CI: 1.06, 2.85) appeared to be modified by coffee consumption, such that RCC risk among individuals with both increased coffee intake and higher blood lead concentration was nearly 3-fold higher RCC risk (HR=3.40, 95% CI: 1.62, 7.13; p-trend 0.003). Conclusion: Contrary to our initial hypothesis, this study suggests that heavy coffee consumption may increase the previously identified association between higher circulating lead (Pb) concentrations and increased RCC risk. Improved assessment of exposure, including potential trace element contaminants in coffee, are needed. Keywords Renal cell cancer • Heavy metals • Coffee consumption • Epidemiology BackgroundWell-established risk factors for renal cell cancer (RCC) include cigarette smoking, elevated blood pressure, and obesity-explaining approximately half of all cases [1]. Other factors which have been associated with RCC include diabetes, low exercise, increased alcohol intake, lead (Pb) exposure, and some occupational exposures [3,40,50].Worldwide, nearly every country has reported increases in the age-adjusted incidence of RCC over the past decade, despite relatively constant population prevalence rates of obesity, smoking and hypertension, and a greater than two-fold increase in the prevalence of controlled hypertension in some countries [50]. Taken together, this suggests the need to identify additional factors for improved RCC prevention. Coffee intake is thought to play a role in chemoprevention of cancer through antioxidant activity of naturally occurring polyphenols in coffee beans (e.g., flavonoids and chlorogenic acids) [33]. Coffee is the major dietary source of polyphenols, accounting for 40 to 45 percent of total daily intake in some populations [10,18]. We and others have identified

show abstract

Biases Inherent in Studies of Coffee Consumption in Early Pregnancy and the Risks of Subsequent Events

Cited by 8 publications

References 121 publications

Key Findings and Implications of a Recent Systematic Review of the Potential Adverse Effects of Caffeine Consumption in Healthy Adults, Pregnant Women, Adolescents, and Children

Key Findings and Implications of a Recent Systematic Review of the Potential Adverse Effects of Caffeine Consumption in Healthy Adults, Pregnant Women, Adolescents, and Children

Miscarriage matters: the epidemiological, physical, psychological, and economic costs of early pregnancy loss

Coffee intake and trace element blood concentrations in association with renal cell cancer among smokers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About