BACKGROUND: Despite potentially relevant chemical differences between filtered and boiled coffee, this study is the first to investigate consumption in relation to the risk of incident cancer. METHODS: Subjects were from the Västerbotten Intervention Project (64,603 participants, including 3,034 cases), with up to 15 years of follow-up. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated by multivariate Cox regression. RESULTS: No associations were found for all cancer sites combined, or for prostate or colorectal cancer. For breast cancer, boiled coffee ≥4 versus <1 occasions/day was associated with a reduced risk (HR = 0.52, CI = 0.30-0.88, p (trend) = 0.247). An increased risk of premenopausal and a reduced risk of postmenopausal breast cancer were found for both total (HR(premenopausal) = 1.69, CI = 0.96-2.98, p (trend) = 0.015, HR(postmenopausal) = 0.60, CI = 0.39-0.93, p (trend) = 0.006) and filtered coffee (HR(premenopausal) = 1.76, CI = 1.04-3.00, p (trend) = 0.045, HR(postmenopausal) = 0.52, CI = 0.30-0.88, p (trend) = 0.045). Boiled coffee was positively associated with the risk of respiratory tract cancer (HR = 1.81, CI = 1.06-3.08, p (trend) = 0.084), a finding limited to men. Main results for less common cancer types included total coffee in renal cell cancer (HR = 0.30, CI = 0.11-0.79, p (trend) = 0.009) and boiled coffee in pancreas cancer (HR = 2.51 CI = 1.15-5.50, p (trend) = 0.006). CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate, for the first time, the potential relevance of brewing method in investigations of coffee consumption and cancer risk, but they must be confirmed in future studies.
BACKGROUND: Despite potentially relevant chemical differences between filtered and boiled coffee, this study is the first to investigate consumption in relation to the risk of incident cancer. METHODS: Subjects were from the Västerbotten Intervention Project (64,603 participants, including 3,034 cases), with up to 15 years of follow-up. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated by multivariate Cox regression. RESULTS: No associations were found for all cancer sites combined, or for prostate or colorectal cancer. For breast cancer, boiled coffee ≥4 versus <1 occasions/day was associated with a reduced risk (HR = 0.52, CI = 0.30-0.88, p (trend) = 0.247). An increased risk of premenopausal and a reduced risk of postmenopausal breast cancer were found for both total (HR(premenopausal) = 1.69, CI = 0.96-2.98, p (trend) = 0.015, HR(postmenopausal) = 0.60, CI = 0.39-0.93, p (trend) = 0.006) and filtered coffee (HR(premenopausal) = 1.76, CI = 1.04-3.00, p (trend) = 0.045, HR(postmenopausal) = 0.52, CI = 0.30-0.88, p (trend) = 0.045). Boiled coffee was positively associated with the risk of respiratory tract cancer (HR = 1.81, CI = 1.06-3.08, p (trend) = 0.084), a finding limited to men. Main results for less common cancer types included total coffee in renal cell cancer (HR = 0.30, CI = 0.11-0.79, p (trend) = 0.009) and boiled coffee in pancreas cancer (HR = 2.51 CI = 1.15-5.50, p (trend) = 0.006). CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate, for the first time, the potential relevance of brewing method in investigations of coffee consumption and cancer risk, but they must be confirmed in future studies.
Authors: Saverio Caini; Giovanna Masala; Calogero Saieva; Marina Kvaskoff; Isabelle Savoye; Carlotta Sacerdote; Oskar Hemmingsson; Bodil Hammer Bech; Kim Overvad; Anne Tjønneland; Kristina E N Petersen; Francesca Romana Mancini; Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault; Iris Cervenka; Rudolf Kaaks; Tilman Kühn; Heiner Boeing; Anna Floegel; Antonia Trichopoulou; Elisavet Valanou; Maria Kritikou; Giovanna Tagliabue; Salvatore Panico; Rosario Tumino; H B As Bueno-de-Mesquita; Petra H Peeters; Marit B Veierød; Reza Ghiasvand; Marko Lukic; José Ramón Quirós; Maria-Dolores Chirlaque; Eva Ardanaz; Elena Salamanca Fernández; Nerea Larrañaga; Raul Zamora-Ros; Lena Maria Nilsson; Ingrid Ljuslinder; Karin Jirström; Emily Sonestedt; Timothy J Key; Nick Wareham; Kay-Tee Khaw; Marc Gunter; Inge Huybrechts; Neil Murphy; Konstantinos K Tsilidis; Elisabete Weiderpass; Domenico Palli Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Youjin Je; Susan E Hankinson; Shelley S Tworoger; Immaculata De Vivo; Edward Giovannucci Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2011-11-22 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Robert Dubrow; Amy S Darefsky; Neal D Freedman; Albert R Hollenbeck; Rashmi Sinha Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2012-03-29 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Gretchen L Gierach; Neal D Freedman; Abegail Andaya; Albert R Hollenbeck; Yikyung Park; Arthur Schatzkin; Louise A Brinton Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2011-10-20 Impact factor: 7.396