| Literature DB >> 30513889 |
Vincenza Gianfredi1, Daniele Nucci2, Angela Abalsamo3, Mattia Acito4, Milena Villarini5, Massimo Moretti6, Stefano Realdon7.
Abstract
Breast cancer (BC) is the most common cancer in women and several factors are involved in its onset. Green tea (GT) has been shown to have potential beneficial effects on different types of cancer. The aim of this review was to evaluate the association between GT regular consumption and risk of BC in women. The risk of BC recurrence and risk of BC in relation to menopausal status were also evaluated. A literature search of PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was conducted. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed to perform the systematic review and meta-analysis. Full texts were downloaded for 40 studies; however, only 13 records were included in the meta-analysis. Eight were cohort studies and five were case-control studies. The pooled sample consisted of 163,810 people. An inverse statistically significant relationship between GT and BC risk, with an Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.85 ((95% CI = 0.80⁻0.92), p = 0.000)), was found. Egger's linear regression test did not show a potential publication bias (intercept 0.33, t = 0.40, p = 0.695), which was also confirmed by the symmetry of the funnel plot. Moreover, no high statistical heterogeneity (Chi² = 31.55, df = 13, I² = 58.79%, p = 0.003) was found. The results of this meta-analysis showed a potential protective effect of GT consumption on BC, especially for BC recurrence.Entities:
Keywords: Camellia sinensis; breast cancer risk; cancer recurrence; epigallocatechin; green tea; meta-analysis; women
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30513889 PMCID: PMC6316745 DOI: 10.3390/nu10121886
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 5.717
Search strategy details.
| Search Strategy | Details |
|---|---|
| Inclusion criteria | P: general adult population (male and female) |
| Exclusion criteria | P: pediatric population |
| Language filter | English |
| Time filter | None (from inception) |
| Database | PubMed/Medline; Scopus; Web of Science |
Abbreviations: P = Population; I = Intervention; C = Comparison; O = Outcome; S = Studies.
Figure 1Flow diagram of studies selection process.
Characteristics extracted from the included studies and quality score.
| Author, Year | No in Analysis | Age (years) | Baseline | Study Period | Study Design | Instrument | Outcome | Green Tea Intake | OR RR HR (CI 95%) | Country | QS/6 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Case = 756 | 20–84 y | BC diagnosis | 2011–2014 | Case-control | In-person interview | recurrence | 3 cups/day | 1.2 | 0.38 | China | 4 |
|
| Case = 369 | 20–74 y | BC diagnosis | 2001–2005 | Case-control | FFQ validated | recurrence | 600 mL/day | 1.27 | 0.20 | Japan | 5 |
|
| 67,422 | 40–69 y | Healthy women | 1990–1994 | Prospective cohort | FFQ | BC | 5 cups/day | 1.12 | 0.60 | Japan | 5 |
|
| Case = 3454 | 25–70 y | BC diagnosis | 1996–2005 | Case-control | FFQ validated | recurrence | 148 ± 124 g/mo | 0.88 | n.a. | China | 4 |
|
| 678 | 45–74 y | Healthy women | 1993–1998 | Prospective cohort | 24 h food recalls validated | BC | 174.6 ± 75.2 µg/day | 1.00 | 0.41 | China | 4 |
|
| Case = 1009 Control = 1009 | 20–87 y | BC diagnosis | 2004–2005 | Case-control | FFQ validated | recurrence | 4 cups/day | 0.57 | 0.001 | China | 6 |
|
| 665 | 45–74 y | Healthy women | 1993–1998 | Prospective cohort | In-person interview | BC | Weekly | 0.91 | n.a. | China | 4 |
|
| 17,353 | >40 y (cohort I) | Healthy women | 1984–1990 | Prospective cohort | FFQ validated (self-administered) | BC | 5 cups/day | 0.96 | 0.51 | Japan | 6 |
|
| 24,769 | 40–64 y (cohort II) | Healthy women | 1984–1990 | Prospective cohort | FFQ validated (self-administered) | BC | 5 cups/day | 0.85 | 0.95 | Japan | 6 |
|
| Case = 501 | 25–74 y | BC diagnosis | 1995–1998 | Case-control | In-person interview | recurrence | 85.7 mL/day | 0.61 | 0.01 | USA | 4 |
|
| 1160 | Mean age 51.5 y | BC diagnosis | 1990–1997 | Follow-up | FFQ (self-administered) not validated | recurrence | 6 cups/day | 0.68 | 0.72 | Japan | 3 |
|
| 38,540 | Mean age | Healthy women | 1979–1981 | Prospective cohort | FFQ (self-administered) not validated | BC and other cancers | 5 cups/day | 1.0 | 0.80 | Japan | 3 |
|
| 34,759 | 40–80 y | Healthy women | 1969–1981 | Prospective cohort | FFQ not validated | BC | 5 cups/day | 0.86 | 0.284 | Japan | 3 |
|
| 472 | Mean age 49.7±11.2 | BC diagnosis | 1984–1993 | Follow-up | FFQ not validated | recurrence | 8 cups/day | 0.775 | 0.15 | Japan | 4 |
Abbreviations: QS = quality score; BC = breast cancer; FFQ = food frequency questionnaire; n.a.= not available; OR = odds ratio; RR = Relative Risk; HR = Hazard Ratio
Figure 2Forest plot (a) of the meta-analysis comparing green tea consumption in breast cancer (BC). Funnel plot (b). Publication year plot (c). Abbreviations: ES = effect size; CI = confidence interval; W = weight; Sig = significance; N = number.
Figure 3Forest plot (a) of the meta-analysis comparing green tea consumption in breast cancer (BC) prevention (case-control studies). Funnel plot (b). Abbreviations: ES = effect size; CI = confidence interval; W = weight; Sig = significance; N = number.
Figure 4Forest plot (a) of the meta-analysis comparing green tea consumption in breast cancer (BC) recurrence. Funnel plot (b). Abbreviations: ES = effect size; CI = confidence interval; W = weight; Sig = significance; N = number.
Figure 5Forest plot (a) of the meta-analysis comparing green tea consumption in breast cancer (BC) (studies with quality score ≥ 5). Funnel plot (b). Abbreviations: ES = effect size; CI = confidence interval; W = weight; Sig = significance; N= number.
Data extracted from primary studies focusing on menopausal status.
| Premenopausal | Postmenopausal | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author, Year | N in Analysis | OR RR HR (CI 95%) | N in Analysis | OR RR HR (CI 95%) |
| Li M. et al. 2016 | 267 | OR 0.62 (0.40–0.97) | 405 | OR 1.40 (1.00–1.96) |
| Iwasaki M. et al. 2014 | 79 | OR 1.10 (0.54–2.23) | 212 | OR 1.42 (0.71–2.85) |
| Iwasaki M. et al. 2010 | 81 | HR 0.97 (0.66–1.41) | 70 | HR 1.08 (0.75–1.55) |
| Shrubsole M. et al. 2009 | 1302 | 0R 0.87 (0.76–1.00) | 799 | OR 0.88 (0.74–1.04) |
Abbreviations: N = number; OR = odds ratio; RR = Relative Risk; HR = Hazard Ratio; CI = confidence interval
Figure 6Forest plot (a) of the meta-analysis comparing green tea consumption in breast cancer (BC) (women in pre-menopausal status). Funnel plot (b). Abbreviations: ES = effect size; CI= confidence interval; W = weight; Sig = significance; N = number.