4.5 Article

Coffee Drinking and Cutaneous Melanoma Risk in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study

期刊

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/jnci/dju421

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Yale-National Cancer Institute (NCI) predoctoral training grant [T32 CA105666]
  2. Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Cutaneous melanoma is the fifth most common cancer in the United States. Modifiable risk factors, with the exception of exposure to ultraviolet radiation (UVR), are poorly understood. Coffee contains numerous bioactive compounds and may be associated inversely with melanoma. However, previous epidemiological evidence is limited. Methods: Coffee intake was assessed at baseline with a food frequency questionnaire in the National Institutes of Health-AARP prospective cohort study. Among 447 357 non-Hispanic whites who were cancer-free at baseline, 2904 incident cases of malignant melanoma were identified during 4 329 044 person-years of follow-up, with a median of 10.5 years of followup. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for coffee intake and subsequent melanoma risk with non-coffee drinkers as the reference group. Statistical tests were two-sided, and P values less than .05 were interpreted as statistically significant. Results: The highest category of coffee intake was inversely associated with malignant melanoma (>= 4 cups/day: HR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.93, P-trend =.01). This association was statistically significant for caffeinated (>= 4 cups/day: HR = 0.75, 95% CI = 0.64 to 0.89, P-trend =.01) but not for decaffeinated coffee (P-trend =.55). Conclusions: Higher coffee intake was associated with a modest decrease in risk of melanoma in this large US cohort study. Additional investigations of coffee intake and its constituents, particularly caffeine, with melanoma are warranted.

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

4.5
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