Association of Tobacco Use and Cancer Incidence in India: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Le résumé fourni par la source

PURPOSE: To estimate the strength of the association between tobacco use and cancer incidence among the Indian population. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from PubMed, Embase, and Virtual Health Library were searched from inception of databases till April 30, 2022. There were no restrictions except for English language and human study. Case-control and cohort studies on cancer incidence in relation to tobacco use were selected. Data were extracted independently by two investigators, and discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. The quality assessment was done using the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: The majority were case-control designs (60, 89.6%), covering diverse geographic regions, with Maharashtra (18, 30%) and Kerala (12, 20%) being the most studied. Pooled effect sizes were calculated using the random-effects model, and forest plots were generated. The risk of any cancer associated with smoked and smokeless tobacco was 2.71 (95% CI, 2.25 to 3.16) and 2.68 (95% CI, 2.22 to 3.14), respectively, indicating similar risks. Gender-wise, smoked tobacco had an association of 2.35 (95% CI, 2.05 to 2.65) for males, whereas for smokeless tobacco, it was 1.77 (95% CI, 1.47 to 2.07) for males and 2.34 (95% CI, 1.26 to 3.42) for females. Regardless of gender, tobacco type, and affected body parts, the risk of cancer due to tobacco use was consistent in the Indian population. Site-specific analysis showed higher risks of respiratory system cancers of 4.97 (95% CI, 3.62 to 6.32) and head and neck cancers of 3.95 (95% CI, 3.48 to 4.42). CONCLUSION: This study underscores that both smoked and smokeless tobacco are equally harmful to human health among the Indian population, providing insights for stakeholders and policymakers to arrive at tobacco-specific interventions.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.