Dose-response Relationships Between Cigarette Smoking and Breast Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

36Citations
Citations of this article
78Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background: The possible association between cigarette smoking and breast cancer risk has been quite controversial. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of all available observational studies published on the issue up to January 2020. Random-effects models were used to compute pooled relative risks (RRs) for cigarette smoking status and dose-risk relationships were evaluated using one-stage random-effects dose-response models. Results: A total of 169 studies were selected, providing a pooled RR for breast cancer of 1.07 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05–1.10) for current, 1.08 (95% CI, 1.06–1.10) for former, and 1.09 (95% CI, 1.07–1.11) for ever smokers, compared to never smokers. Results were consistent in case-control and cohort studies. No meaningful differences were observed across strata of most covariates considered, nor according to relevant genetic mutations and polymorphisms (ie, BRCA mutation, N-acetyltransferase and glutathione S-transferase genotypes, and P53). Breast cancer risk increased linearly with intensity of smoking (RR 1.12; 95% CI, 1.08–1.16 for 20 cigarettes/day and 1.26; 95% CI, 1.17–1.36 for 40 cigarettes/day), and with increasing duration of smoking (RR 1.05; 95% CI, 1.03–1.08 for 20 years of smoking and 1.11; 95% CI, 1.06–1.16 for 40 years of smoking). Conclusion: The present large and comprehensive meta-analysis—conducted using an innovative approach for study search— supports the evidence of a causal role of tobacco smoking on breast cancer risk.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Scala, M., Bosetti, C., Bagnardi, V., Possenti, I., Specchia, C., Gallus, S., & Lugo, A. (2023). Dose-response Relationships Between Cigarette Smoking and Breast Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Journal of Epidemiology, 33(12), 640–648. https://doi.org/10.2188/jea.JE20220206

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free