Effect of Cigarette Smoking and Alcohol Consumption in the Aetiology of Cancer of the Oral Cavity, Pharynx and Larynx

Choi, Sujin; Kahyo, Hiroaki

doi:10.1093/ije/20.4.878

Cited by 137 publications

(86 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many others have reported the odds ratios relating to alcohol drinking for the pharynx and larynx. 1,5,6 In this investigation, aOR of current drinkers for pharyngeal cancer (aOR 5 6.4) was higher than that for laryngeal cancer (aOR 5 4.1). Alcohol drinking had higher odds ratios across the categories of drinking duration, daily quantity and cumulative exposure level in pharyngeal cancer than in laryngeal cancer (Table II), indicating that alcohol drinking has a more prominent independent carcinogenic effect and stronger dose-response effect on the pharynx than on the larynx.…”

Section: Alcohol Drinking Vs Pharynx and Larynxmentioning

confidence: 49%

“…Choi et al 6 concluded that the risk for cancer of the oral cavity, pharynx and larynx rose for current smokers but declined for ex-smokers. Duration of smoking and daily quantity were significantly associated with higher risks.…”

Section: Cigarette Smoking Vs Pharynx and Larynxmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6] Betel quid chewing with or without tobacco, a widespread habit in south and east Asian countries, is an important risk factor having both independent and synergistic effects with cigarette smoking and alcohol drinking for oral cancer. [7][8][9][10][11][12][13] The risk of betel quid chewing without tobacco on the pharynx and larynx in humans has not been explored and is unknown.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Different impact from betel quid, alcohol and cigarette: Risk factors for pharyngeal and laryngeal cancer

Lee

Kuo

Tsai

et al. 2005

Intl Journal of Cancer

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The risks of betel quid chewing with or without tobacco, alcohol drinking and cigarette smoking have been well explored in the oral cavity but not in the pharynx and larynx. We conducted a case-control study to investigate the association of these three risk factors to cancers of the pharynx and larynx in Taiwan. A total cases of 148 pharyngeal cancer, 128 laryngeal cancer and 255 hospital controls, all men, were recruited. Betel quid chewing was a significant independent risk factor (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 5 7.7; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5 4.1-15.0) similar to that of alcohol drinking (aOR 5 6.6; 95% CI 5 3.5-13.0) for pharyngeal cancer, but not for laryngeal cancer (aOR 5 1.3; 95% CI 5 0.7-2.5) on which cigarette smoking (aOR 5 7.1) exerts a stronger significant independent risk than alcohol drinking (aOR 5 3.8). For pharyngeal cancers, chewers who consumed >20 quid/day, chewed with inflorescence in the quid or swallowed the betel quid juice were at higher risks; significant dose-response effects were found in daily quantity of drinking and chewing, and cumulative quantity of drinking. Synergistic effects from the 3 risk factors existed both on the pharynx (aOR 5 96.9) and the larynx (aOR 5 40.3), and attributed for 93.1% and 92.9% respectively. Our study is the first evidence to show that betel quid chewing without tobacco has different impact on the pharynx (digestive tract) and the larynx (airway), and supports the concept that exposure quantity and direct mucosal contact with the betel quid juice may contribute to carcinogenesis. Our results show an important insight into the impact of betel quid chewing on other sites of the digestive tract other than the oral cavity. ' 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Key words: risk factors; areca; laryngeal neoplasms; pharyngeal neoplasms; betel; alcohol; cigarette Cigarette smoking and alcohol drinking are risk factors for cancers of the oral cavity, pharynx and larynx.1-6 Betel quid chewing with or without tobacco, a widespread habit in south and east Asian countries, is an important risk factor having both independent and synergistic effects with cigarette smoking and alcohol drinking for oral cancer.7-13 The risk of betel quid chewing without tobacco on the pharynx and larynx in humans has not been explored and is unknown.Betel nut (areca nut) is consumed by an estimated 400-600 million people worldwide, mainly IndoAsian, Chinese and Taiwanese. It has a long history of use and is deeply ingrained in many sociocultural and religious activities. 7,14 Betel nut is the seed of the fruit of the oriental palm, Areca catechu. It is seldom chewed alone but is usually consumed in the form of betel quid, which is most often prepared by adding different ingredients to the areca nut, for example, the betel fruit (unripe fruit, inflorescence of Piper betle), betel leaf (leaf of Piper betle), slaked lime, catechu and tobacco, mainly according to the local tradition and for the purpose of flavor enhancing. 11,14 In general, although chewers from different countries prepare betel quid ...

show abstract

Section: Alcohol Drinking Vs Pharynx and Larynxmentioning

confidence: 49%

Section: Cigarette Smoking Vs Pharynx and Larynxmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Different impact from betel quid, alcohol and cigarette: Risk factors for pharyngeal and laryngeal cancer

Lee

Kuo

Tsai

et al. 2005

Intl Journal of Cancer

100

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…17 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Cui et al 18 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Dikshit and Kanhere 19 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Elahi et al 20 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Elwood et al 21 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Franceschi et al 22 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Franceschi et al 23 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 Franco et al 24 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Greenberg et al 25 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Guneri et al 26 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Hashibe et al 27 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Hayes et al 28 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Herrero et al 29 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Kabat et al 30 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Ko et al 31 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Levi et al 32 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Llewellyn et al 33 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Llewellyn et al 34 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Lu et al 35 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 Maden et al 36 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Marshall et al 37 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Mashberg et al 38 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Merchant et al 39 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 Merletti et al 40 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Moreno-Lopez et al 41 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 Muscat et al 42 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Nandakumar et al 43 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Olshan et al 44 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Pacella-Norman 45 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Rao et al 46 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Rogers et al 47 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Rosenquist 48 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Schwartz et al 49 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Smith et al 50 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 Toporcov et al 51 1 53 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 Zheng et al 54 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 Znaor et al 55 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 A: Expli...…”

Section: Study Characteristicsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Socioeconomic inequalities and oral cancer risk: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of case‐control studies

Conway

Petticrew

Marlborough³

et al. 2008

Intl Journal of Cancer

325

221

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is uncertainty and limited recognition of the relationship between socioeconomic inequalities and oral cancer. We aimed to quantitatively assess the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and oral cancer incidence risk. A systematic review of casecontrol studies obtained published and unpublished estimates of the SES risk related to oral cancer. Studies were included which reported odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% CIs of oral cancer with respect to SES, or if the estimates could be calculated or obtained. Meta-analyses were performed on subgroups: SES measure, age, sex, global region, development level, time-period and lifestyle factor adjustments; while sensitivity analyses were conducted based on study methodological issues. Forty-one studies provided 15,344 cases and 33,852 controls which met our inclusion criteria. Compared with individuals who were in high SES strata, the pooled ORs for the risk of developing oral cancer were 1.85 (95%CI 1.60, 2.15; n 5 37 studies) for those with low educational attainment; 1.84 (1.47, 2.31; n 5 14) for those with low occupational social class; and 2.41 (1.59, 3.65; n 5 5) for those with low income. Subgroup analyses showed that low SES was significantly associated with increased oral cancer risk in high and lower income-countries, across the world, and remained when adjusting for potential behavioural confounders. Inequalities persist but are perhaps reducing over recent decades. Oral cancer risk associated with low SES is significant and comparable to lifestyle risk factors. Our results provide evidence to steer health policy which focus on lifestyles factors toward an integrated approach incorporating measures designed to tackle the root causes of disadvantage. ' 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Key words: meta-analysis; oral cancer; SES; socioeconomic status; systematic review In 2000, oral cancer (ICD-10 C00-06) was estimated to be the 8th most common cancer worldwide-with an estimated 267,000 new cases and 128,000 deaths, and with the greatest burden in developing countries. 1 Despite a wealth of literature on the effects of poverty and inequality on health, 2 the effect of socioeconomic circumstances on oral cancer is given little recognition in a predominant medical model approach to research and prevention on the risks of the disease. 3 Recent published work on the relationship between socioeconomic status (SES) and oral cancer has mainly been in the form of descriptive epidemiology studies linking routine registry data to census data. From such studies, increased risk of oral cancer appears associated with high levels of area-based socioeconomic deprivation, 4,5 although this was not reflected in a review of incidence studies from across the world which utilised mainly individual measures of SES. 6 Area-based measures are liable to the 'ecological fallacyÕ whereby individuals are allocated SES based on their area of residence. The few analytical studies to focus on SES have also been equivocal, and socioeconomic correlates have recently been found to be c...

show abstract

“…tobacco use, alcohol consumption, genetics). The variability of dependent variables, incidence and mortality, was addressed [5].…”

Section: Data Collectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incidence and Mortality Rates of Oral Cancer in California from 1995-2004

Saini¹

2016

JDHODT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effect of Cigarette Smoking and Alcohol Consumption in the Aetiology of Cancer of the Oral Cavity, Pharynx and Larynx

Cited by 137 publications

References 0 publications

Different impact from betel quid, alcohol and cigarette: Risk factors for pharyngeal and laryngeal cancer

Different impact from betel quid, alcohol and cigarette: Risk factors for pharyngeal and laryngeal cancer

Socioeconomic inequalities and oral cancer risk: A systematic review and meta‐analysis of case‐control studies

Incidence and Mortality Rates of Oral Cancer in California from 1995-2004

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About