Cited by 185

Oral use of Swedish moist snuff (snus) and risk for cancer of the mouth, lung, and pancreas in male construction workers: a retrospective cohort study

Luo, Juhua, Ye, Weimin, Zendehdel, Kazem, Adami, Johanna, Adami, Hans-Olov, Boffetta, Paolo, Nyrén, Olof·2007·The Lancet

Abstract

Background Although classified as carcinogenic, snuff is used increasingly in several populations. Scandinavian moist snuff (snus) has been proposed as a less harmful alternative to smoking, but precise data on the independent associations of snus use with site-specific cancers are sparse. We aimed to assess the risks for cancer of the oral cavity, lung, and pancreas. Methods Detailed information about tobacco smoking and snus use was obtained from 279 897 male Swedish construction workers in 1978-92. Complete follow-up until end of 2004 was accomplished through links with population and health registers. To distinguish possible effects of snus from those of smoking, we focused on 125 576 workers who were reported to be never-smokers at entry. Adjusted relative risks were derived from Cox proportional hazards regression models. Findings 60 cases of oral, 154 of lung, and 83 of pancreatic cancer were recorded in never-smokers. Snus use was independently associated with increased risk of pancreatic cancer (relative risk for ever-users of snus 2.0; 95% CI 1.2-3.3, compared with never-users of any tobacco), but was unrelated to incidence of oral (0.8, 95% CI 0.4-1.7) and lung cancer (0.8, 0.5-1.3). Interpretation Use of Swedish snus should be added to the list of tentative risk factors for pancreatic cancer. We were unable to confirm any excess of oral or lung cancer in snus users.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(07)60678-3

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Luo, J., Ye, W., Zendehdel, K., Adami, J., Adami, H.-O., Boffetta, P., & Nyrén, O.
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-06
Volume
369
Issue
9578
Pages
2015-2020
ISSN
0140-6736
Cited by
185
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review