coffee, hot drinks, and cancer

A working group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the specialized cancer agency of the World Health Organization, reviewed data on the relationship between caffeine as well as hot beverages with cancer, finding that caffeine is good but hot beverages bad (See coffee not carcinogenic lancet onc2016 in dropbox, or doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30239-X). the full Monograph is in press, but Lancet Oncology published a summary. details:

caffeine had been listed in 1991 as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" based on limited data of ?increase in bladder cancer. but:
    --bladder cancer: newer, better data (>1000 observational and experimental studies) suggest that there is no consistent relationship, and raised the concern in older studies of potential confounding from cigarettes or occupational exposures.
    --liver cancer: there seems to be an inverse correlation, based on case-control studies, with decreasing risk by 15% for each cup of coffee/day. beneficial effects on liver fibrosis and cirrhosis
    --breast cancer: meta-analysis of 1 million women suggests no association or ?modest inverse one
    ​--pancreas and prostate: no increase
    --endometrium: likely inverse association with coffee
    ​--other cancers (lung, colorectal, stomach, esophagus, oral cavity, ovary, brain, childhood leukemia): data inconsistent or not evaluable because of biases, etc
    ​--conclusion: "overall coffee drinking was evaluated as unclassifiable as to it carcinogenicity to humans"
    
hot drinks, IARC classified Mate, served traditionally at a very hot temperature (>65°C​), as "probably carcinogenic to humans". Mate is made from dried leaves of Ilex paraguariensis (Mate Yerba) with varying caffeine content and mainly consumed in South America, and less so in Middle East, Europe, North America. 
    --esophageal cancer: significantly increased risk, but only when drunk very hot or hot. and similar results have been found for other very hot drinks
    --animal studies: very hot water (65-70°C) increased the incidence of nitrosamine-induced esophageal tumors. and hot water (>65°C​) can act as a tumor promoter, perhaps through chronic cell injury
    --conclusion: "drinking very hot beverages at above 65°C was classified as 'probably carcinogenic to humans', but "drinking mate that is not very hot was 'not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans'"

Commentary

--good news for those of us who really like or require coffee, as well as coffee growers, who have not been doing so well lately (see http://www.centralamericadata.com/en/article/main/Good_News_for_Coffee?u=29f723785a1c27639a0d8732b32d9c8c&s=n&e=3&mid=[MESSAGEID )
-- for prior blogs, see http://gmodestmedblogs.blogspot.com/2016/04/coffee-and-decreased-colon-cancer.html   which reviews a study finding decreased risk of colon cancer in coffee drinkers, with a dose-response curve. Also this blog refers to others finding decrease in total mortality, decreased coronary artery calcium scores, and one of chocolate decreasing peripheral artery disease

Comments

Post a Comment

if you would like to receive the near-daily emails regularly, please email me at gmodest@uphams.org

Popular posts from this blog

HDL a negative risk factor? or cholesterol efflux??

Although the data on HDL being protective of atherosclerotic disease is pretty consistent, there are negative studies, and the data on medications which dramatically improve HDL levels (eg, the cholesteryl ester transfer protein --CETP --inhibitors, such as torcetrapib) are clinically disappointing. there have been several explanations for this. for example, some HDL particles are "pro-inflammatory" and elicit an atherosclerotic response (which may be related to apolipoprotein C-III). a new article in NEJM highlights another angle -- that the issue is not the HDL number, but HDL's functionality in the reverse transport of cholesterol, as measured by the cholesterol efflux capacity (see  lipids HDL efflux capacity vs amt NEJM 2014 in dropbox, or  DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1409065). This article looks at the Dallas Heart Study, where they measured HDL levels, HDL particle concentrations, and cholesterol efflux capacity in 2924 adults free of cardiovascular disease and followed p
Read more

Drug company shenanigans: narcolepsy drug

I have not done a blog for a long time on drug company shenanigans. So it is my great pleasure to bring up a brand-new drug company approach to garner huge amounts of money (see  https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/28/business/jazz-narcolepsy-avadel-patents.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare  ).  Based on an article by  Rebecca Robbins of the New York Times, who has written several articles on drug company excesses   As background, this will be my 42 nd  such blog: for the array, see  https://bucommunitymed.wpengine.com/page/4/?s=drug+company+shenanigans   Th e drug company  approach  this time  to extending  their  patents has a few “interesting” angles: -- this is a medication manufactured by Jazz Pharmaceuticals to treat narcolepsy: there are 2 versions: Xyrem and Xywav (Xywav has less sodium, so is marketed to those who should be on a low sodium diet). These meds are basically derivatives of gammahydroxybutyric acid (GHB)      -- the drug actually has a pretty
Read more

UPDATE: ASCVD risk factor critique

  I decided to do an extensive update of my prior ASCVD (atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease) risk analysis and critique of risk calculators, with much more information about the “non-traditional” risk factors. I felt that there should be more data/clarification, since I think we are really undertreating/not preventing the most common cause of death by relying on the ASCVD risk calculators   -- Cardiovascular risk models:      -- many of us rely on the various cardiovascular risk models to determine the appropriate approach to patients, and these are often integrated into the electronic medical records      -- these risk models have several very important limitations:          -- they are typically based on community data, eg from the Framingham study etc. But, in clinical practice, we are dealing with the individual and not the community:              -- there is very clear evidence that there are many individual risk factors that are associated with increased risk of a cardiovascu
Read more