Frontiers in Physiology · 2017 · 33 citations · 44 references
MedicineOncologyPreventive MedicineCancer EpidemiologyEpidemiologyMeta-analysisBladder CancerCancer RiskCarcinogenicity Of Dietary ExposuresDose-response Meta-analysisBladder Cancer IncidenceCase-control Association StudiesDose ResponseDose-response Curve AnalysisDose-response Relationships In CancerExposure Odds RatioProspective Cohort DataTea Consumption Behavior
Background and Objective: Controversial results of the association between tea (black tea, green tea, mate, and oolong tea) consumption and risk of bladder cancer were reported among epidemiological studies. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis of observational studies to investigate the association. Methods: We searched the PubMed and Embase for studies of tea consumption and bladder cancer that were published in any language up to March, 2016. Cohort or case-control studies were included in the meta-analysis. All statistical analyses were performed in Stata 12.0 software. Results: Totally, 25 case-control studies including 15 643 cases and 30 795 controls, and 7 prospective cohort studies including 1807 cases and 443 076 participants were included in our meta-analysis. The overall odds ratio (OR) with corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) between tea consumption and bladder cancer risk was 0.96 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.06) (in a comparison of highest versus lowest category). Specific analysis for black tea, green tea, and mate yielded similar results. The dose-response analysis showed the summary OR for an increment of 1 cup/day of tea consumption was 1.01 (95% CI 0.97 to 1.05). Conclusion: Results of this meta-analysis suggested that there was no significant association between tea consumption and bladder cancer risk.
44
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement
David Moher, A. Liberati, Jennifer Tetzlaff et al. · BMJ · 2009 · 83.3K citations · Full text
Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test
Matthias Egger, George Davey Smith, Martin Schneider et al. · BMJ · 1997 · 56.3K citations
Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis
Julian P. T. Higgins, Simon G. Thompson · Statistics in Medicine · 2002 · 36.7K citations
Global cancer statistics, 2012
Lindsey A. Torre, Freddie Bray, Rebecca L. Siegel et al. · CA A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · 2015 · 27.4K citations · Full text