SynthesisEuropean journal of public health2026
Evaluating the effect of cigarettes smoking on oesophageal cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis with dose-response relationships.
Synthesis in European journal of public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Oesophageal cancer (OC) affects over 600 000 people annually, with tobacco smoking and alcohol consumption as primary risk factors. We aimed to synthesize existing evidence to quantify the dose-response relationship between smoking and OC risk. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted, examining case-control and cohort studies published up to April 2026. Pooled relative risks (RR) were estimated using random-effects models. Dose-response relationships by intensity, duration, and time since quitting of smoking were modelled using log-linear models, with linear or spline terms based on model fit. Of 221 eligible articles, 178 original studies were included. Compared with never smokers, the pooled RR of OC was 2.68 (95% confidence interval; CI: 2.37-3.03; n = 66) for current smokers, 1.71 (95% CI: 1.54-1.90; n = 61) for former smokers, and 2.15 (95% CI: 1.98-2.34; n = 144) for ever smokers. For current smokers compared with never smokers, the risk was 3.03 (95% CI: 2.42-3.79; n = 35) for squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and 2.25 (95% CI: 1.80-2.82; n = 14) for adenocarcinoma (OAC). OC risk increased non-linearly with smoking intensity, linearly with smoking duration, and decreased linearly with time since quitting. This meta-analysis reinforces the strong association between smoking and OC, with higher risk for OSCC than OAC. The observed non-linear dose-response relationship indicates that the risk of OC increases sharply even at low levels of smoking intensity, doubling below nine cigarettes and tripling below 17 cigarettes per day. These findings support complete smoking avoidance as the most effective prevention strategy of OC.
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.