4.6 Article

A nationwide cohort study of cigarette smoking and risk of neovascular age-related macular degeneration in East Asian men

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 101, Issue 10, Pages 1367-1373

Publisher

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bjophthalmol-2016-309952

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Few longitudinal studies have evaluated the relationship between cigarette smoking and risk of neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD) among Asian populations. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate the association between cigarette smoking and risk of neovascular AMD among Korean men. Methods Men between the ages of 45 and 79 years included in the Korea National Health Insurance Service database from 2002 through 2013. We compared hazard ratios (HR) for neovascular AMD between 64 560 past/current and 64 560 never smokers by 1:1 propensity-matched analysis and 85 267 past/current and 72 347 never smokers by unmatched cohort and propensity-adjusted analysis. Results The risk of neovascular AMD among past/ current smokers was 50% higher than that among never smokers (propensity-adjusted whole cohort analysis: HR, 1.48; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.79; propensity-matched analysis: HR, 1.50; 95% CI 1.22 to 1.84), with the risk more pronounced among current than past smokers (current vs past smokers: propensity-adjusted whole cohort analysis, HR, 1.66; 95% CI 1.35 to 2.04 vs HR, 1.15, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.52; propensity-matched analysis, HR, 1.65; 95% CI 1.32 to 2.05 vs HR, 1.21; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.63). Duration of smoking and daily cigarette consumption was associated with the incidence of neovascular AMD in a dose-dependent manner (p<0.001 for trend). Conclusions Cigarette smoking is associated with a strong risk of neovascular AMD among Korean men. These data highlight the public health impact of smoking on blindness in Asia.

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