© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press.
BRIEF COMMUNICATION |
Carbonated Soft Drink Consumption and Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma
Affiliations of authors: Yale University School of Medicine and Yale Cancer Center, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, New Haven, CT (STM, HAR, RD, LB); National Cancer Institute, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, NIH, DHHS, Bethesda, MD (W-HC, JFF); University of North Carolina, School of Public Health, Department of Epidemiology, Chapel Hill, NC (MDG); Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Program in Epidemiology, and University of Washington, School of Public Health and Community Medicine, Department of Epidemiology, Seattle, WA (TLV, JLS); New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services, Center for Cancer Initiatives, Trenton, NJ (JBS); Columbia University, Department of Pathology, New York, NY (HR); New York University Medical Center, Department of Pathology, New York, NY (ABW); International Epidemiology Institute, Rockville, MD (WJB)
Correspondence to: Susan T. Mayne, PhD, Yale University School of Medicine, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, 60 College Street, New Haven, CT 06520-8034 (e-mail: Susan.Mayne{at}yale.edu).
Carbonated soft drinks (CSDs) have been associated with gastroesophageal reflux, an established risk factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma. As both CSD consumption and esophageal adenocarcinoma incidence have sharply increased in recent decades, we examined CSD as a risk factor for esophageal and gastric cancers in a U.S. multicenter, population-based case-control study. Associations between CSD intake and risk were estimated by adjusted odds ratios (ORs), comparing the highest versus lowest quartiles of intake. All statistical tests were two-sided. Contrary to the proposed hypothesis, CSD consumption was inversely associated with esophageal adenocarcinoma risk (highest versus lowest quartiles, OR = 0.47, 95% confidence interval = 0.29 to 0.76; Ptrend = .005), due primarily to intake of diet CSD. High CSD consumption did not increase risk of any esophageal or gastric cancer subtype in men or women or when analyses were restricted to nonproxy interviews. These findings indicate that CSD consumption (especially diet CSD) is inversely associated with risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma, and thus it is not likely to have contributed to the rising incidence rates.
Correspondence about this Article
- Re: Carbonated Soft Drink Consumption and Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma
- Mohandas K. Mallath
J Natl Cancer Inst 2006 98: 644-645.[Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]
- Re: Carbonated Soft Drink Consumption and Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma
- Silvano Gallus, Renato Talamini, Esteve Fernandez, Luigino Dal Maso, Silvia Franceschi, and Carlo La Vecchia
J Natl Cancer Inst 2006 98: 645-646.[Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
U. Lim, P. Hartge, L. M. Morton, and A. Schatzkin Consumption of Aspartame-Containing Beverages and Incidence of Hematopoietic and Brain Malignancies Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2007; 16(7): 1528 - 1529. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. Lim, A. F. Subar, T. Mouw, P. Hartge, L. M. Morton, R. Stolzenberg-Solomon, D. Campbell, A. R. Hollenbeck, and A. Schatzkin Consumption of aspartame-containing beverages and incidence of hematopoietic and brain malignancies. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., September 1, 2006; 15(9): 1654 - 1659. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Lagergren, P. Viklund, and C. Jansson Carbonated soft drinks and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma: a population-based case-control study. J Natl Cancer Inst, August 16, 2006; 98(16): 1158 - 1161. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. K. Mallath Re: Carbonated soft drink consumption and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst, May 3, 2006; 98(9): 644 - 645. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Gallus, R. Talamini, E. Fernandez, L. Dal Maso, S. Franceschi, and C. La Vecchia Re: Carbonated soft drink consumption and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst, May 3, 2006; 98(9): 645 - 646. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||

