3.9 Review

Smoking and the Risk of Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Journal

ARCHIVES OF DERMATOLOGY
Volume 148, Issue 8, Pages 939-946

Publisher

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/archdermatol.2012.1374

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Roche
  2. British Heart Foundation
  3. Cancer Research UK
  4. Economic and Social Research Council
  5. Medical Research Council
  6. Department of Health, under UK Clinical Research Collaboration

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to collate evidence of the effects of smoking on the risk of nonmelanoma skin cancer. Data Sources: We searched 4 electronic databases (from inception to October 2010) and scanned the reference lists of the publications retrieved to identify eligible comparative epidemiologic studies. Study Selection: Titles, abstracts, and full text were assessed independently by 2 authors against prespecified inclusion/exclusion criteria. Data Extraction: Data were extracted and quality was assessed independently by 2 authors using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Data Synthesis: Meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models. Results are presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs. Heterogeneity was assessed using I-2. Twenty-five studies were included. Smoking was significantly associated with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.15-2.01; I-2=64%; 6 studies). Smoking was not significantly associated with basal cell carcinoma (OR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.82-1.09; I-2=59%; 14 studies) or nonmelanoma skin cancer (OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.21-1.79; I-2=34%; 2 studies). Conclusion: This study clearly demonstrates that smoking increases the risk of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma; however, smoking does not appear to modify the risk of basal cell carcinoma.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.9
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available