4.7 Article

Tobacco smoking, but not Swedish snuff use, increases the risk of multiple sclerosis

期刊

NEUROLOGY
卷 73, 期 9, 页码 696-701

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181b59c40

关键词

-

资金

  1. Swedish Medical Research Council
  2. Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research
  3. EU [LSHM-CT-2005-018637]
  4. Bibbi and Niels Jensens Foundation
  5. Montel Williams Foundation
  6. Soderberg Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The aim of this study was to estimate the influence of tobacco smoking and Swedish snuff use on the risk of developing multiple sclerosis (MS). Methods: A population-based case-control study was performed in Sweden, using incident cases of MS (902 cases and 1,855 controls). A case was defined as a subject from the study base who had received a diagnosis of MS, and controls were randomly selected from the study base. The incidence of MS among smokers was compared with that of never-smokers. We also investigated whether the use of Swedish snuff had an impact on the risk of developing MS. Results: Smokers of both sexes had an increased risk of developing MS (odds ratio [OR] 1.4, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.2-1.7 for women, and OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.3-2.5 for men). The increased risk was apparent even among subjects who had previously smoked moderately (<= 5 pack-years) prior to index, and the risk increased with increasing cumulative dose (p < 0.0001). The increased risk for MS associated with smoking remained up to 5 years after stopping smoking. In contrast, taking Swedish snuff for more than 15 years decreased the risk of developing MS (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.8). Conclusions: Smokers of both sexes run an increased risk of developing multiple sclerosis (MS), and the risk increases with cumulative dose of smoking. However, the use of Swedish snuff is not associated with elevated risk for MS, which may indicate that nicotine is not the substance responsible for the increased risk of developing MS among smokers. Neurology (R) 2009; 73: 696-701

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据