Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26481317›Full record

SynthesisBMC cancer2015

Coffee consumption and the risk of gastric cancer: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.

Liqing Li, Yong Gan, Chunmei Wu, Xianguo Qu, Gang Sun, Zuxun Lu

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMC cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Coffee Consumption and Cancer Risk: An Assessment of the Health Implications Based on Recent Knowledge.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

6 authors.

Liqing LiDepartment of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 13 Hangkong Road, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China. liliqing_lily@163.com.
Yong GanDepartment of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 13 Hangkong Road, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China. scswj2008@163.com.
Chunmei WuDepartment of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 13 Hangkong Road, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China. 88907576@qq.com.
Xianguo QuSchool of Health Management, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China. quxianguo@163.com.
Gang SunDepartment of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 13 Hangkong Road, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China. sunhoney163@163.com.
Zuxun LuDepartment of Social Medicine and Health Management, School of Public Health, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, No. 13 Hangkong Road, Wuhan, 430030, Hubei, China. zuxunlu@yahoo.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSeveral observational studies suggest that coffee consumption may be associated with an increased risk of gastric cancer, but the results are inconsistent. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the relationship of coffee consumption with gastric cancer risk and quantify the dose-response relationship between them.

methodsRelevant prospective studies were identified by a search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to May 2015 and by reviewing the references of retrieved articles. Two independent reviewers extracted data and performed the quality assessment. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled risk estimates and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). The heterogeneity was assessed using the I (2) statistic. Publication bias was assessed by using funnel plot, the Begg test and the Egger test.

resultsThirteen prospective cohort studies with 20 independent reports involving 3,368 patients with gastric cancer and 1,372,811 participants during a follow-up period ranging from 4.3-8 years were included. Compared with the lowest consumption level of coffee, the pooled relative risk (RR) was 1.13 (95 % CI: 0.94-1.35). The dose-response analysis indicated that, the RR of gastric cancer was 1.03 (95 % CI; 0.95-1.11) for per 3 cups/day of coffee consumption. Any nonlinear association of gastric cancer risk with coffee consumption was not found (P for nonlinearity = 0.68). Subgroup analyses indicated that the pooled RR for participants from the United States comparing the highest with the lowest coffee consumption was 1.36 (95 % CI, 1.06-1.75, I (2) = 0 %). In addition, people with higher coffee consumption was associated with 25 % higher risk of gastric cancer in equal to or less than 10 years follow-up group (RR = 1.25; 95 % CI, 1.01-1.55, I (2) = 0 %). Visual inspection of a funnel plot and the Begg's and the Egger's tests did not indicate evidence of publication bias.

conclusionsThis meta-analysis does not support the hypothesis that coffee consumption is associated with the risk of gastric cancer. The increased risk of gastric cancer for participants from the United States and equal to or less than 10 years follow-up group associated with coffee consumption warrant further studies.

Indexed as

CoffeeGlobal HealthHumansIncidenceProspective StudiesRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsStomach NeoplasmsCoffee

Identifiers

PMID26481317
PMCPMC4615385

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.