Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26206423›Full record

Trial reportCancer causes & control : CCC2015

The Minnesota Green Tea Trial (MGTT), a randomized controlled trial of the efficacy of green tea extract on biomarkers of breast cancer risk: study rationale, design, methods, and participant characteristics.

Hamed Samavat, Allison M Dostal, Renwei Wang, Sarah Bedell, Tim H Emory, Giske Ursin, Carolyn J Torkelson, Myron D Gross, Chap T Le, Mimi C Yu and 5 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Green tea (Camellia sinensis) for the prevention of cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Plasma FThe Journal of nutrition · 2017
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Chemopreventive and therapeutic effects ofFrontiers in pharmacology · 2025
    Article
  16. Exploration of plasma adiponectin, leptin, andJournal of nutritional science · 2023
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

Hamed SamavatDepartment of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA.
Allison M DostalDepartment of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA.
Renwei WangDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Sarah BedellDepartment of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA.
Tim H EmoryDepartment of Radiology, Center for Magnetic Resonance Research, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Giske UrsinCancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway.
Carolyn J TorkelsonDepartment of Family Medicine and Community Health, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Myron D GrossDepartment of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Chap T LeDivision of Biostatistics, School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Mimi C YuDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Chung S YangDepartment of Chemical Biology, Ernest Mario School of Pharmacy, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ, USA.
Douglas YeeMasonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Anna H WuDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Jian-Min YuanDivision of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Mindy S KurzerDepartment of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Minnesota, St Paul, MN, USA. mkurzer@umn.edu.
University of Minnesota · USUniversity of Minnesota Medical Center · USUniversity of Southern California · USRutgers, The State University of New Jersey · USUniversity of Oslo · NOUniversity of Pittsburgh · USUPMC Hillman Cancer Center · US

Funding

Women's CancerP30CA077598 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA TWIN CITIES · PI Douglas Yee · 1998 to 2026
$100.4M
University of Minnesota Clinical and Translational Science Institute (UMN CTSI)UL1TR000114 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI BLAZAR, BRUCE R · 2012 to 2015
$35.0M
Green Tea and Reduction of Breast Cancer RiskR01CA127236 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI KURZER, MINDY SUSAN · 2008 to 2013
$5.7M
Training Program in Nutrition and CancerT32CA132670 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI ANDERSON, KRISTIN ELLEN · 2009 to 2013
$1.6M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000114NCATS NIH HHS UL1TR000114NCI NIH HHS P30 CA077598NCI NIH HHS R01 CA127236NCI NIH HHS T32 CA132670NCI NIH HHS T32CA132670
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe Minnesota Green Tea Trial (MGTT) was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial investigating the effect of daily green tea extract consumption for 12 months on biomarkers of breast cancer risk.

methodsParticipants were healthy postmenopausal women at high risk of breast cancer due to dense breast tissue with differing catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) genotypes. The intervention was a green tea catechin extract containing 843.0 ± 44.0 mg/day epigallocatechin gallate or placebo capsules for 1 year. Annual digital screening mammograms were obtained at baseline and month 12, and fasting blood and 24-h urine samples were provided at baseline and at months 6 and 12. Primary endpoints included changes in percent mammographic density, circulating endogenous sex hormones, and insulin-like growth factor axis proteins; secondary endpoints were changes in urinary estrogens and estrogen metabolites and circulating F2-isoprostanes, a biomarker of oxidative stress.

resultsThe MGTT screened more than 100,000 mammograms and randomized 1,075 participants based on treatment (green tea extract vs. placebo), stratified by COMT genotype activity (high COMT vs. low/intermediate COMT genotype activity). A total of 937 women successfully completed the study and 138 dropped out (overall dropout rate = 12.8 %).

conclusionsIn this paper we report the rationale, design, recruitment, participant characteristics, and methods for biomarker and statistical analyses.

Indexed as

MammographyTeaAntioxidantsBiomarkersBreastBreast NeoplasmsCatechinCatechol O-MethyltransferaseDouble-Blind MethodEstrogensF2-IsoprostanesFemaleGenotypeGonadal Steroid HormonesHumansInsulin-Like Growth Factor IAntioxidantsBiomarkersCatechinCatechol O-Methyltransferaseepigallocatechin gallateEstrogensF2-IsoprostanesGonadal Steroid HormonesInsulin-Like Growth Factor ITeaBreast cancerGreen teaMammographic densityPostmenopausal womenSex hormones

Identifiers

PMID26206423
PMCPMC4567901
OpenAlexW1894792485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.