4.3 Article

Evaluation of breast cancer risk associated with tea consumption by menopausal and estrogen receptor status among Chinese women in Hong Kong

Journal

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 40, Issue -, Pages 73-78

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2015.11.013

Keywords

Tea consumption; Breast cancer; Menopausal status; Estrogen receptor status

Funding

  1. Research Grants Council of Hong Kong [474811]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: Experimental studies implicate tea and tea polyphenols may be preventive against breast cancer, but evidence from epidemiological studies has been inconsistent. We conducted a hospital-based case-control study to evaluate the role of tea especially green tea in breast cancer etiology. Methods: We consecutively recruited 756 incident breast cancer cases and 789 hospital controls who had completed information on tea consumption. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for tea consumption using unconditional multivariable logistic regression. We further conducted stratified analyses to assess whether the effect of tea consumption varied by menopausal status and estrogen receptor (ER). Results: Overall, 439 (58.1%) breast cancer cases and 434 (55.0%) controls reported habits of regular tea drinking, showing an adjusted OR of 1.01 (95% CI: 0.78-1.31) and 1.20 (95% CI: 0.80-1.78) for any tea and green tea drinking, respectively. Regular tea drinking was significantly associated with a lower risk for breast cancer in pre-menopausal women (OR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.40-0.97) but an increased risk in postmenopausal women (OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.00-1.96). The positive association among postmenopausal women was strongest among ER-negative green tea drinkers (OR = 2.99, 95% CI: 1.26-7.11). Conclusions: Tea or green tea drinking was not associated with overall breast cancer risk, which may be masked by the differential effect in pre-and post-menopausal women. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available