Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2013;65(6):802-12.
doi: 10.1080/01635581.2013.805423.

Green tea consumption and risk of esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis of published epidemiological studies

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Green tea consumption and risk of esophageal cancer: a meta-analysis of published epidemiological studies

Li-Xuan Sang et al. Nutr Cancer. 2013.

Abstract

We performed a meta-analysis to analyze the association of various levels of green tea consumption with risk of esophageal cancer. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for studies of green tea consumption and esophageal cancer and identified 12 observational studies. For esophageal cancer, the pooled relative risk (RR) was 1.09 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.76-1.55] for greatest vs. non/least green tea consumption; however, there was significant heterogeneity across studies (P = 0.00, I(2) = 75.5%). Compared with subjects who drank no/least green tea, the pooled RR was 1.14 (95% CI = 0.97-1.35) for moderate drinkers, 0.94 (95% CI = 0.77-1.13) for those who drank little, and 0.97 (95% CI = 0.77-1.22) for all subjects who had ever drunk green tea. Subgroup analysis showed that the RR was 0.46 (95% CI = 0.29-0.73) for female subjects. The results of the present meta-analysis are that any association between green tea and risk of esophageal cancer remains unclear. Subgroup analyses indicated that greater consumption of green tea might reduce the risk of esophageal cancer in female subjects. However, the results are based on limited research. Further research is needed to confirm the results and clarify the likely biological mechanisms.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources