ArticleInternational journal of cancer2016
Lung cancer in never smokers in the UK Million Women Study.
Article in International journal of cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
42 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The association between dietary fiber intake and risk of lung cancer: a GRADE-assessed systematic review and dose response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.Nutrition journal · 2026Pooled it
- Prediction models for early detection and diagnosis of lung cancer in people who have never smoked: a systematic review and critical appraisal.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2026Pooled it
- Relationship between household air pollution and lung cancer in never smokers in high-income countries: a systematic review.BMJ open · 2025Pooled it
- Association between second-hand smoke exposure and lung cancer risk in never-smokers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024Pooled it
- Consumption of red meat and processed meat and cancer incidence: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.European journal of epidemiology · 2021Pooled it
- The potential for malignancy from atopic disorders and allergic inflammation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical and experimental allergy : journal of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology · 2020Pooled it
- Asthma and the risk of lung cancer: a meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2017Pooled it
- Comparative analysis of lung cancer risk factors between never-smokers and heavy smokers: a nationwide population-based study in Korea.Translational lung cancer research · 2026Article
- Vegetarian diets and cancer risk: pooled analysis of 1.8 million women and men in nine prospective studies on three continents.British journal of cancer · 2026Article
- Sex differences in cancer incidence: prospective analyses in the UK Biobank.British journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Inflammatory diseases and risk of lung cancer among individuals who have never smoked.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Sex-based differences in lung cancer susceptibility and molecular genetics in the 2020s.Heliyon · 2025Article
- Age at lung cancer diagnosis in females versus males who never smoke by race and ethnicity.British journal of cancer · 2024Article
- Reproductive factors and risk of lung cancer among 300,000 Chinese female never-smokers: evidence from the China Kadoorie Biobank study.BMC cancer · 2024Article
- Exploring the association between asthma and chronic comorbidities: impact on clinical outcomes.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Health effects associated with exposure to secondhand smoke: a Burden of Proof study.Nature medicine · 2024Article
- Electronic cigarettes and health outcomes: epidemiological and public health challenges.International journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Lung cancer in never smokers (LCINS): development of a UK national research strategy.BJC reports · 2023Review
- Sex Differences in Lung Cancer.Cancers · 2023Review
- Perinatal Psychoactive Substances Use: A Rising Perinatal Mental Health Concern.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
To assess directly the effects of various risk factors on lung cancer incidence among never smokers, large prospective studies are needed. In a cohort of 1.2 million UK women without prior cancer, half (634,039) reported that they had never smoked. Mean age at recruitment was 55 (SD5) years, and during 14 (SD3) years of follow-up, 0.2% (1,469) of these never smokers developed lung cancer. Cox regression was used to estimate relative risks (RRs) of lung cancer for 34 potential risk factors, of which 31 were nonsignificant (p > 0.05). The remaining three risk factors were associated with a significantly increased incidence of lung cancer in never smokers: non-white vs. white ethnicity (RR = 2.34, 95% CI 1.55-3.52, p < 0.001), asthma requiring treatment vs. not (RR = 1.32, 1.10-1.58, p = 0.003) and taller stature (height ≥ 165 cm vs. <160 cm: RR = 1.16, 1.03-1.32, p = 0.02). There was little association with other sociodemographic, anthropometric or hormonal factors, or with dietary intakes of meat, fish, fruit, vegetables and fiber. The findings were not materially affected by restricting the analyses to adenocarcinomas, the most common histological type among never smokers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.