Article

The relation between smokeless tobacco and cancer in Northern Europe and North America. A commentary on differences between the conclusions reached by two recent reviews.

PN Lee Statistics and Computing Ltd, Surrey, UK.
BMC Cancer (Impact Factor: 3.33). 08/2009; 9:256. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-9-256
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Smokeless tobacco is an alternative for smokers who want to quit but require nicotine. Reliable evidence on its effects is needed. Boffetta et al. and ourselves recently reviewed the evidence on cancer, based on Scandinavian and US studies. Boffetta et al. claimed a significant 60-80% increase for oropharyngeal, oesophageal and pancreatic cancer, and a non-significant 20% increase for lung cancer, data for other cancers being "too sparse". We found increases less than 15% for oesophageal, pancreatic and lung cancer, and a significant 36% increase for oropharyngeal cancer, which disappeared in recent studies. We found no association with stomach, bladder and all cancers combined, using data as extensive as that for oesophageal, pancreatic and lung cancer. We explain these differences.
For those cancers Boffetta et al. considered, we compared the methods, studies and risk estimates used in the two reviews.
One major reason for the difference is our more consistent approach in choosing between study-specific never smoker and combined smoker/non-smoker estimates. Another is our use of derived as well as published estimates. We included more studies, and avoided estimates for data subsets. Boffetta et al. also included some clearly biased or not smoking-adjusted estimates. For pancreatic cancer, their review included significantly increased never smoker estimates in one study and combined smoker/non-smoker estimates in another, omitting a combined estimate in the first study and a never smoker estimate in the second showing no increase. For oesophageal cancer, never smoker results from one study showing a marked increase for squamous cell carcinoma were included, but corresponding results for adenocarcinoma and combined smoker/non-smoker results for both cell types showing no increase were excluded. For oropharyngeal cancer, Boffetta et al. included a markedly elevated estimate that was not smoking-adjusted, and overlooked the lack of association in recent studies.
When conducting meta-analyses, all relevant data should be used, with clear rules governing the choice between alternative estimates. A systematic meta-analysis using pre-defined procedures and all relevant data gives a lower estimate of cancer risk from smokeless tobacco (probably 1-2% of that from smoking) than does the previous review by Boffetta et al.

1 Bookmark
 · 
60 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to investigate the genotoxicity of waterpipe smoking in the lymphocytes of waterpipe smokers using chromosomal aberrations (CAs) assay. Fifty waterpipe smokers and 18 healthy non-smokers volunteered to participate in the study. Additionally, 18 heavy cigarette smokers were recruited for comparison. Chromosomal aberrations (CAs) assay was used to evaluate DNA damage in the lymphocytes. The results showed that similarly to cigarette smoking, waterpipe smoking significantly increased the frequencies of CAs (p < 0.01). In addition, the frequencies of CAs increased with more waterpipe use. Waterpipe smoking causes DNA damage to lymphocytes and the damage increases with more waterpipe use.
    International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health 06/2012; 25(3):218-24. · 1.31 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Tobacco and ethanol consumption are crucial factors in the development of various diseases including cancer. In this investigation, we evaluated the combined effects of a number of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), with ethanol and tobacco products on healthy individuals. METHODS: Pure nicotine, cigarette smoke extract, and Swedish snuff (snus) extract were used. The effects were examined by means of in vitro cell cycle progression and cell death of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) obtained from healthy donors. RESULTS: After 3 days, in vitro, resting PBMCs entered the S and G2 stage in the presence of 100 µM nicotine. The PBMCs only proceeded to S stage, in the presence of 0.2% ethanol. The nicotine- and ethanol-induced normal cell cycle progression correlated to a number of SNPs in the IL12RB2, Rad 52, XRCC2, P53, CCND3, and ABCA1 genes. Certain SNPs in Caspases 8, IL12RB2, Rad 52, MMP2, and MDM2 genes appeared to significantly influence the effects of EtOH-, snus-, and snus + EtOH-induced cell death. Importantly, the highest degree of cell death was observed in the presence of smoke + EtOH. The amount of cell death under this treatment condition also correlated to specific SNPs, located in the MDM2, ABCA1, or GASC1 genes.Conclusions:Cigarette smoke in combination with ethanol strongly induced massive cell death. Long-term exposure to smoke and ethanol could provoke chronic inflammation, and this could be the initiation of disease including the development of cancer at various sites.
    Nicotine & Tobacco Research 10/2012; · 2.48 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We examined whether use of snus influenced cognitions in terms of smoking expectancies and smoking prototype perceptions in a direction that could promote smoking initiation, thus highlighting potential causal mechanisms between the use of snus and smoking behavior. A telephone-based longitudinal survey among Norwegian adolescents was conducted with two points of measurement during a 1-year period in 2006-2007. The respondents were divided into four groups: Group 1: snus initiators during the period (N = 54), Group 2: regular snus users (N = 160), Group 3: non-users of snus and cigarettes (N = 376), and Group 4: regular smokers (N = 306). Wilcoxon tests were applied to determine any changes in smoking cognitions from 2006 to 2007. The group of snus initiators (Group 1) reported a significantly higher level of expectancies of smoking to promote negative affect reduction at follow-up, while all other cognitions remained stable. The group of smokers (Group 4) reported on average positive smoking cognitions, and significant changes were observed during the period. However, among regular snus users (Group 2) and non-users (Group 3), there were no significant changes in any of the smoking cognitions. The uptake of snus might influence expectancies of cigarettes to reduce negative affect in a direction facilitating smoking initiation, but the use of snus does not appear to influence the majority of cognitions known to promote smoking initiation among adolescents.
    Addiction Research and Theory 12/2012; 20(6):447-455. · 1.03 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

View
14 Downloads
Available from
May 22, 2014