4.6 Article

Citrus consumption and risk of basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the skin

Journal

CARCINOGENESIS
Volume 36, Issue 10, Pages 1162-1168

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/carcin/bgv109

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Institute of Health [UM1 CA186107, P01 CA87969, UM1 CA167552, R01 CA137165]
  2. National Psoriasis Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Animal experiments have demonstrated the photocarcinogenic properties of furocoumarins, a group of naturally occurring chemicals that are rich in citrus products. We conducted a prospective study for citrus consumption and risk of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the skin based on data from 41 530 men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986-2010) and 63 759 women in the Nurses' Health Study (1984-2010) who were free of cancers at baseline. Over 24-26 years of follow-up, we documented 20 840 incident BCCs and 3544 incident SCCs. Compared to those who consumed citrus products less than twice per week, the pooled multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios were 1.03 [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.99-1.08] for BCC and 1.14 (95% CI: 1.00-1.30) for SCC for those who consumed two to four times per week, 1.06 (95% CI: 1.01-1.11) for BCC and 1.15 (95% CI: 1.02-1.28) for SCC for five to six times per week, 1.11 (95% CI: 1.06-1.16) for BCC and 1.22 (95% CI: 1.08-1.37) for SCC for once to 1.4 times per day and 1.16 (95% CI: 1.09-1.23) for BCC and 1.21 (95% Cl: 1.06-1.38) for SCC for 1.5 times per day or more (P-trend = 0.001 for BCC and 0.04 for SCC). In contrast, consumption of non-citrus fruit and juice appeared to be inversely associated with risk of BCC and SCC. Our findings support positive associations between citrus consumption and risk of cutaneous BCC and SCC in two cohorts of men and women, and call for further investigations to better understand the potential photocarcinogenesis associated with dietary intakes.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available