Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of individual and overall (random-effects) estimates for the two reviews – oesophageal cancer

From: The relation between smokeless tobacco and cancer in Northern Europe and North America. A commentary on differences between the conclusions reached by two recent reviews

 

ST usea

     

Ref

Type

Exposure

Inclusion of smokersb

Reviewc

Sex

Relative risk (95% CI)

Comments

[4]

Snuff

Ever

SNS

L&H

M

1.40 (0.61–3.24)

 
 

Snuff

Ever

SNS

B

M

1.4 (0.6–3.2)

Estimates agreed

[22]

Snuff

Ever

SNS

L&H

M

1.00 (0.79–1.27)e

Estimate for NS also available

 

Snuff

Ever

NS

B

M

3.5 (1.6–7.6)

NS not SNS; squamous cell carcinoma not all oesophageal cancer

[23]

Chew

Ever

NS

L&H

M

1.18 (0.28–4.90)e

Not included by B

 

Chew

Ever

NS

L&H

F

2.69 (0.92–7.87)e

Not included by B

[24]

ST

Ever

NS

L&H

M

1.2 (0.1–13.3)

 
 

ST

Ever

NS

B

M

1.2 (0.1–13.3)

Estimates agree

[18]

Snuff

Ever

SNS

L&H

M

1.2 (0.7–2.2)

 
 

Snuff

Ever

SNS

B

M

1.2 (0.7–2.2)

Estimates agree

[25]

Snuff

Ever

SNS

L&H

M+F

1.31 (0.89–1.92)e

 
 

Snuff

Ever

SNS

B

M+F

1.4 (0.9–2.3)

Squamous cell carcinoma not all oesophageal cancer

Total

   

L&H

 

1.13 (0.95–1.36)

7 estimates

    

B

 

1.6 (1.1–2.3)

5 estimates

  1. a ST = smokeless tobacco; ever exposure includes undefined use.
  2. b NS = never smokers; SNS = smokers and nonsmokers combined (with adjustment for smoking).
  3. c L&H = Lee and Hamling review [2]; B = Boffetta et al. review [1].
  4. d To within rounding error, as B only expressed estimates to one decimal place.
  5. e Estimated from data provided.