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
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Understanding the molecular pathways perturbed in smokeless tobacco- (ST) associated head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) is critical for identifying novel complementary agents for effective disease management. Activation of nuclear factor-kappaB (NF-κB) and cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) was reported in ST-associated HNSCC by us [Sawhney,M. et al. (2007) Expression of NF-kappaB parallels COX-2 expression in oral precancer and cancer: association with smokeless tobacco. Int. J. Cancer, 120, 2545-2556]. In search of novel agents for treatment of HNSCC, we investigated the potential of guggulsterone (GS), (4,17(20)-pregnadiene-3,16-dione), a biosafe nutraceutical, in inhibiting ST- and nicotine-induced activation of NF-κB and signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) 3 pathways in HNSCC cells. GS inhibited the activation of NF-κB and STAT3 proteins in head and neck cancer cells. This inhibition of NF-κB by GS resulted from decreased phosphorylation and degradation of nuclear factor of kappa light polypeptide gene enhancer in B-cells inhibitor, alpha the inhibitory subunit of NF-κB. Importantly, treatment of HNSCC cells with GS abrogated both ST- and nicotine-induced nuclear activation of NF-κB and pSTAT3 proteins and their downstream targets COX-2 and vascular endothelial growth factor. Furthermore, GS treatment decreased the levels of ST- and nicotine-induced secreted interleukin-6 in culture media of HNSCC cells. In conclusion, our findings demonstrated that GS treatment abrogates the effects of ST and nicotine on activation of NF-κB and STAT3 pathways in HNSCC cells that contribute to inflammatory and angiogenic responses as well as its progression and metastasis. These findings provide a biologic rationale for further clinical investigation of GS as an effective complementary agent for inhibiting ST-induced head and neck cancer.
    Carcinogenesis 12/2010; 32(3):368-80. · 5.64 Impact Factor
  • Journal of pediatric urology 11/2007; 3(5):413-4. · 1.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: ABSTRACT: Over the past five years there has been exponential expansion of interest in tobacco harm reduction (THR), with a concomitant increase in the number of published studies. The purpose of this manuscript is to review and analyze influential contributions to the scientific and medical literature relating to THR, and to discuss issues that continue to stimulate debate. Numerous epidemiologic studies and subsequent meta-analyses confirm that smokeless tobacco (ST) use is associated with minimal risks for cancer and for myocardial infarction; a small increased risk for stroke cannot be excluded. Studies from Sweden document that ST use is not associated with benign gastrointestinal disorders and chronic inflammatory diseases. Although any form of nicotine should be avoided during pregnancy, the highest risks for the developing baby are associated with smoking. It is documented that ST use has been a key factor in the declining rates of smoking and of smoking-related diseases in Sweden and Norway. For other countries, the potential population health benefits of ST are far greater than the potential risks. In follow-up studies, dual users of cigarettes and ST are less likely than exclusive smokers to achieve complete tobacco abstinence, but they are also less likely to be smoking. The health risks from dual use are probably lower than those from exclusive smoking. E-cigarette users are not exposed to the many toxicants, carcinogens and abundant free radicals formed when tobacco is burned. Although laboratory studies have detected trace concentrations of some contaminants, it is a small problem amenable to improvements in quality control and manufacturing that are likely with FDA regulation as tobacco products. There is limited evidence from clinical trials that e-cigarettes deliver only small doses of nicotine compared with conventional cigarettes. However, e-cigarette use emulates successfully the cigarette handling rituals and cues of cigarette smoking, which produces suppression of craving and withdrawal that is not entirely attributable to nicotine delivery. THR has been described as having "the potential to lead to one of the greatest public health breakthroughs in human history by fundamentally changing the forecast of a billion cigarette-caused deaths this century."
    Harm Reduction Journal 07/2011; 8:19. · 1.26 Impact Factor

Full-text (3 Sources)

Available from
May 22, 2014