4.3 Article

Green and black tea intake in relation to prostate cancer risk among Singapore Chinese

Journal

CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL
Volume 23, Issue 10, Pages 1635-1641

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10552-012-0041-8

Keywords

Black tea; Diet; Green tea; Prospective cohort; Prostate cancer; Singapore Chinese

Funding

  1. NIH [R01CA144034]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tea is one of the most commonly consumed beverages worldwide. To date, observational data from prospective cohort studies investigating the relationship between green and black tea intake and prostate cancer risk are sparse and equivocal. In a population-based, prospective cohort study of Chinese men in Singapore, we investigated the relationship between green and black tea intake and prostate cancer risk. Tea consumption data for 27,293 men were collected at baseline (between 1993 and 1998) using a validated food frequency questionnaire. After an average of 11.2 years of follow-up, 298 men had developed prostate cancer. Proportional hazards regression methods were used to assess the associations between tea intake and prostate cancer risk. There was no association between daily green tea intake and prostate cancer risk, compared with no green tea intake [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.08; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.79, 1.47]. For black tea, a statistically significant positive association and trend were observed for daily intake compared with no black tea intake (HR = 1.41, 95 % CI 1.03, 1.92; p for trend < 0.01) Few prospective data are available from populations that have both a high level and wide range of black and green tea intake; this study represents a unique opportunity to evaluate their individual effects on prostate cancer risk. Our findings support the notion that green tea intake does not protect against prostate cancer and that black tea intake may increase prostate cancer risk.

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