Epidemiologic Reviews Copyright © 2001 by the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health All rights reserved
Vol. 23, No. 1 Printed in U.S.A.
Smoking and Prostate Cancer
Kym Hickey,1 Kim-Anh Do, 2 and Adele Green 3
associations between current smoking and prostate cancer ranged in both magnitude and direction, from negative, 0.38 (72), to positive, 2.9 (71). The association between past smoking and prostate cancer also ranged from negative, 0.6 (35, 91), to positive, 1.9 (51). The quality of studies varied greatly, with scores ranging from 2.5, out of 22 (80), to 19, out of 22 (34). There was little evidence of publication bias, as seen from figure 1. Most of the prospective cohort studies and all of the nested case-control studies that used incident cases as the outcome found no association between current smoking and prostate cancer (34,35,37,39^2,44,45, 56-59). However, a positive association was observed in a cohort of elderly rural residents of Iowa (36), in a cohort of health plan members in California (38), and in a cohort of Swedish construction workers (43). In the Iowa study (36), the association with current smoking was more pronounced with regional and distant prostate cancer (relative risk (RR) = 8.7; 95 percent confidence interval (CI): 1.9,40) than localized disease (RR = 2.5; 95 percent CI: 0.9,7.1). The Iowa study (36) and the Swedish construction workers study (43) found evidence of a significant dose-response relation between current smoking and risk of incident prostate cancer. The majority of the prospective cohort studies that used death from prostate cancer as the outcome, in contrast, found a positive association between current smoking and prostate cancer (43, 46, 47, 49, 51-53, 60). The strength of the association observed between current smoking and fatal prostate cancer was weak—on the order of approximately a 30 percent increase. While four of the 12 mortality cohort studies (48, 50, 54, 55) did not find a positive relation, the upper limit of the confidence intervals of the relative risk ranged from 1.2 to 1.5. The US veterans cohort found a significant dose-response relation between current smoking and fatal prostate cancer (49). The Health Professionals Foliow-Up Study found that men who had smoked 15 or more pack-years of cigarettes within the preceding 10 years were at a higher risk of distant metastatic prostate cancer (RR = 1.81; 95 percent CI: 1.05, 3.11) and fatal prostate cancer (RR = 2.06; 95 percent CI: 1.08, 3.90) relative to nonsmokers (34). This study also found a significant doseresponse relation between smoking over the prior 10 years and distant metastatic and fatal prostate cancer (34). Ten of 15 population-based case-control studies (66, 70, 73, 74, 81-83, 89, 94, 96) and 12 of 16 hospital-based casecontrol studies (62, 69, 77, 80, 84-88, 91, 93, 95) produced essentially null results with regard to current smoking and prostate cancer. Five other case-control studies used hospi-
INTRODUCTION
The relation between smoking and many cancers is established but its role in prostate cancer, the most common cancer in US males, is not clear. Given the high prevalence of smoking and the high prostate cancer morbidity, there are substantial public health implications if smoking is related to prostate cancer, and, hence, a review of this topic is warranted. METHODS
A Medline search was conducted and covered the period from 1966 to March 2000. The bibliographies of identified papers were reviewed, and three papers presented at a conference were ascertained. Only analytical studies which contained a specific prostate cancer-smoking estimate (or provided enough data to allow calculation of such an estimate) and were written in English were included in this review. Table 1 lists those studies not included (1-13). Each of the studies included was scored for quality by a reviewer, and 58 percent of the studies were independently scored by a second reviewer. The scoring system developed incorporated the main methodological issues of study design, selection issues, measurement of prostate cancer and smoking status, control of the five most likely confounding factors identified (age (14, 15, 16), race (14, 17, 18), family history of prostate cancer (17, 19-25), dietary fat (26), history of vasectomy (27-33)), and statistical methods. There was excellent agreement between reviewers in the scoring of the case-control studies and reasonable agreement in the scoring of cohort studies. EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES
Tables 2-5 describe characteristics of the 23 prospective cohort studies (34—55), five nested case-control studies (56-60), one retrospective cohort study (61), and 36 casecontrol studies (62-97) included in this review. The reported Received for publication July 31, 2000, and accepted for publication November 16, 2000. Abbreviations: Cl, confidence interval; DHEAS, dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate; RR, relative risk. 1 Repatriation Medical Authority, Brisbane, Australia. 2 Department of Biostatistics, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX. 3 Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia. Reprint requests to Dr. Kym Hickey, Repatriation Medical Authority, GPO Box 1014, Brisbane, Queensland 4001, Australia (email:
[email protected]).
115
116
Hickeyetal.
TABLE 1. Studies excluded from review and reason for exclusion Study description (reference no.)
Weir and Dunn (1), 1970, United States, prospective cohort Armenian et at. (2), 1975, United States, case-control study Williams and Horm (3), 1977, United States, cross-sectional study Kolonel and Winkelstein (4), 1977, United States, case-control study Niijima and Koiso (5), 1980, Japan, case-control study Jackson et al. (6), 1980, United States and Nigeria, case-control study Wigle et al. (7), 1980, Canada, case-control study Newell et al. (8), 1989, United States, case-control study LeMarchand et al. (9), 1991, Hawaii, case-control study Van Der Gulden et al. (10), 1992, The Netherlands, case-control study Pawlega et al. (11), 1996, Poland, case-control study Tulinius et al. (12), 1997, Iceland, prospective cohort Deneo-Pellegrini et al. (13), 1999, Uruguay, case-control study
Data provided on smoking and prostate cancer
Reason for exclusion
Relative risk = 0.78
95% confidence interval not provided*
No major difference between case and control groups regarding smoking Relative risk = 0.81 (calculated from data provided)
Estimate of effect not provided* 95% confidence interval not provided*
Odds ratio = 1.1
95% confidence interval not provided*
Almost the same proportions in both study groups were smokers When cases and controls were compared no apparent trend was detected for smoking Odds ratio = 0.9
Estimate of effect not provided*
Cases and controls did not differ with regard to smoking No statistically significant difference between cases and controls in smoking habits Cases and controls did not differ in smoking habits Cigarette smoking did not significantly influence prostate cancer Smoking was not a significant risk factor for prostate cancer Tobacco consumption not associated with prostate cancer risk
Estimate of effect not provided*
95% confidence interval not provided* Estimate of effect not provided* Estimate of effect not provided*
Estimate of effect not provided* Estimate of effect not provided* Estimate of effect not provided* Estimate of effect not provided*
• And unable to be calculated from the data provided by the study.
tal cases and population controls, and four of these studies produced null findings (67, 68, 92, 97). These studies suffered from several methodological shortcomings. Differentia] measurement error may have been present in all mortality cohorts stemming from the use of cause of death as the study endpoint. Smokers are more likely to die, especially from tobacco-related diseases (98). Hence, individuals with prostate cancer who smoked would be more likely to die than individuals with prostate cancer who did not smoke, and if prostate cancer was recorded as the underlying cause of death on the death certificate when it was not, more thorough ascertainment of prostate cancer in smokers would occur (46). The Health Professionals Follow-up Study (34) conducted an analysis among men diagnosed with prostate cancer and showed that the presence of smoking-related comorbidities predicted death from other causes (RR = 1.63) but did not predict death attributed to prostate cancer (RR = 1.07). Surveillance bias may have been partly responsible for the positive association reported in two of the incident cohort studies (36, 43) as smokers may have had more contact with medical practitioners due to other smoking-related diseases that required treatment. Investigators of the Health Professionals Follow-up Study (34) also looked at the possibility that a lower frequency of screening at baseline among smokers may have accounted for the elevated mortality from prostate cancer found in their
study (through a delay in diagnosis and treatment). In an analysis limited to men who had reported a negative digital rectal examination in 1986-1988, the associations between smoking and distant metastatic and fatal prostate cancer from 1988 to 1994 became even stronger. A recent study found that nicotine dependence was not related to prostate cancer screening (99). Uncontrolled confounding by dietary fat was a threat in most studies as only four adjusted for it (34,46, 66, 91), and another four studies did not find an association between dietary fat and prostate cancer (35, 51, 89, 96). Assuming dietary fat is a risk factor for prostate cancer, dietary fat could confound the relation between smoking and prostate cancer (100, 101), since numerous cross-sectional studies have found that smokers are more likely to consume a diet high in fat (102-112). No study appeared to have considered the effects of treatment received by prostate cancer cases. If smokers received less aggressive therapy than nonsmokers, then this may partly account for the positive association observed with fatal prostate cancer. Four studies have followed up cases of prostate cancer and found a lower survival rate among prostate cancer cases who smoked compared with nonsmokers (34, 113-115), although a hospital-based study in Japan differed (93). One interpretation of the findings relating relatively recent smoking to advanced incident prostate cancer or fatal Epidemiol Rev Vol. 23, No. 1, 2001
.
Study characteristics of prospective cohorts/nested case-control studies investigating incident prostate cancer
Study ference no.)
Location, years'
Norway, 1977-1983
16-56
69/24,051
n et al. (36), 1997
United States, 1981-1982
65-101
71/1,050
t al. (37), 1989
United States, 1974
225, white
180/14,000
t al. (38), 1994
United States, 1978-1985
238/43,432
rchand et al. (39), 4
United States, 1975-1980
39-87, white and black 245, multiethnic (Hawaii)
and et al. (40), 6 son et al. (41), 9 and Lund (42), 4 et al. (43), 1996
Norway, 1964-1965
38-72
707/11,863
46-68, Japanese
174/7,999
Norway, 1972-1978
35-50
220/43,685
Sweden, 1971-1975
60
2,368/135,006
Finland, 1962
30-74
209/4,601
Finland, 1972,1977
15-74
109/11,373
Retired, white
138/5,106
42-82
406/9,152
50-84, white
54/1,776
215, white
166/16,481
United States, 1916-1950
College students
243/29,000
United States, 1986-1989
40-86
81/1,177
Sweden, 1967,1970 United States, 1972-1974 Finland, 1966-1972
Age
17
Age, race
16
Age, race
16
Age, race
16
Age
16
Age, race
15
Age
15
1.04; 0.85, 1.27 1.00;0.92, 1.08 0.56; 0.36, 0.83 0.6; 0.3, 1.1 2.2; 1.2,4.4 1.2; 0.7, 2.1 0.49;0.16,1.57 1.24; 0.91, 1.67 1.46;1.07,1.94 1.1;0.8, 1.5 Quartiles in cigar day: 1) 1.0 2)0.9;0.6, 1 3) 1.0; 0.7, 4) 1.0; 0.6, 1.1; 0.9, 1.3 0.9;0.7, 1.1 0.87:0.61,1.23 0.89:0.61, 1.29 1.08:0.90,1.30
Age
15
Age?
11
Age?
11
Age
10
Age
15
Age
14
1.11:1.01,1.23 1.09; 0.98, 1.22 1.11:0.90,1.36 0.93; 0.68, 1.24 0.82; 0.57, 1.14 1.07; 0.80, 1.40 0.9;0.40,1.73 0.8;0.62, 1.01 1.00:0.71,1.39 0.91;0.68, 1.21 1.3; 0.61, 2.79
Current smoker
Age, race
14
0.76;0.51,1.14
Ever cigarettes
Age
13
1.1;1.0,1.3
Current cigarettes Past cigarettes
Age
12
1.79:1.01,2.94 1.3;0.8,2.2
Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Ever cigarettes
1,369/47,781
erg et al. (58), 6H pson et al. (57), 9H a et al. (59), 911 more et al. (56), 4D et al. (61), 1999H
19
Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Ever cigarettes
40-75
United States, 1981-1985
Age, race, family history, dietary fat, vasectomy Age, dietary fat
Smoking definition!
United States, 1986
nen et al. I (44), 6 nen et al. II (44), 6 et al. (45), 1990
Relative risk; 9 confidence inter
No. of cases/ cohort size
nnucci et al. (34), 9 d et al. (35), 1997
United States, 1965-1968
Quality scorei
Age range (years), race
198/8,881
Current tobacco Past tobacco Current tobacco Past tobacco Current tobacco Past tobacco Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current tobacco Past tobacco Current cigarettes
Confounders
17
rs to years when study subjects were enrolled. erence group: never cigarettes (34-38, 40, 41, 45, 61), never tobacco (43, 58), whole country (44), noncigarettes (57), lowest quartile (39), nonsmoker (59). es out of 22. tive risk and confidence interval calculated from data provided ((34) past cigarettes, (35) current cigarettes, (38) current cigarettes, (59) current smoker, (61) current cigarettes); confidence inte lated from data provided (44, 45, 57); relative risk expressed as risk per 10 pack-years of cigarette smoking (56); risk per 10 cigarettes (42). ted case-control study (56-59); retrospective cohort study (61).
.
Study characteristics of prospective cohorts and nested case-control studies investigating fatal prostate cancer
Study ference no.)
nucci et al. (34), 9 et al. (43), 1996
uez et al. (46), 7 ond and Horn (47), 8 and Hirayama (48), 0 et al. (49), 1991
Location, years*
Age range (years), race
No. of cases/ cohort size
Smoking definitionf
Confounders
Quality
Age, race, family history, dietary fat, vasectomy Age
19
Age, race, family history, dietary fat, vasectomy Age, race
14 13
1.58:0.81,3.10 1.28; 0.95, 1.68 1.26; 1.06, 1.50 1.03; 0.84, 1.33 1.34; 1.16, 1.56 0.99; 0.87, 1.12 1.75; 1.37,2.19
scorei
Relative risk; 9 confidence inter
United States, 1986
40-75
103/47,781
Sweden, 1971-1975
60
709/135,006
United States, 1982
£30, white and black
United States, 1952
50-69, white
134/187,783
Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current tobacco Past tobacco Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Ever cigarettes
>40
147/122, 261
Current cigarettes
Age
13
1.1; 0.7, 1.5
31-84, white
4,607/250,000
Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Ever cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes
Age
13
Age
13
Age, race, dietary fat
12
Age
12
Age, race
12
1.18; 1.09, 1.28 1.13; 1.03, 1.24 0.99; 0.87, 1.34 0.86; 0.80, 1.12 2.0; 1.1,3.7 1.9; 1.1,3.3 1.83; 1.01,3.05 1.51:0.63,3.02 1.31; 1.13, 1.52
Ever cigarettes Current tobacco Past tobacco Current cigarettes
Age Age
11 10
Japan, 1965 United States, 1954, 1957
1,748/450,279
al. (50), 1994
Great Britain, 1951
35->85
569/34,439
etal. (51), 1990
United States, 1966
>35, white
149/17,633
l et al. (52), 1993
Norway, 1972-1978
lin et al. (53), 1996
United States, 1973-1975
ond (54), 1966 nsen et al. (55), 7 lzer et al. (60), 9H
United States, 1959-1960 Sweden, 1963 Switzerland, 1971-1973
35-49 35-57, white and black 35-84 18-69 cases 64, controls 49 (mean)
32/44,290 826/348,874 319/441,542 193/25,129 30/2,974
None
15
7
1.02; 0.81, 1.28 0.93; 0.72, 1.18 1.0; 0.72, 1.35 1.38; 0.67, 2.85
rs to years when study subjects were enrolled. rence group' never cigarettes (34, 48, 52), never tobacco (43, 46, 47, 49-51, 54, 55), non-cigarettes (53), nonsmokers (60). es out of 22. tive risk and confidence interval calculated from data provided ((34) past cigarettes, (50, 52) current and past cigarettes, (54) ever cigarettes, (55) current tobacco, (60)); confidence interval on m data provided ((47) ever cigarettes, (55) past tobacco). ed case-control study that used fatal prostate cancer.
4.
Study characteristics of population-based case-control studies
Study eference no.)
Location, years*
etal. (81), 1996
China, 1992-1995
et al. (82), 1994
United States, 1986-1989
Smoking definitionf
50-94
239/472
Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Current cigarettes Past cigarettes Ever cigarettes
Age, race
14.5
Age, race
13
Age
13
Age
12
Age
12
Age, race, dietary fat
12
Age
12 12
0.78; 0.63, 1.09; 0.98, 1.06; 0.66, 1.05; 0.72, 1.04; 0.62, 0.93; 0.67, 0.91; 0.77,
11
1.9; 1.2, 3.0
11
1.11; 0.86, 1.44
40-79, white/ black