Skip to main content

Table 3 Hazard ratios of gastric cancer by type of alcoholic beverage and intake per one occasion

From: Alcohol consumption and risk of gastric cancer: a cohort study of men in Kaunas, Lithuania, with up to 30 years follow-up

Alcoholic beverage No. of cases Person-years at risk Incidence rate/10,000 person-years HR (95% CI)a HR (95% CI)b
Beer      
0 121 93,036 13.0 0.84 (0.59–1.20) 0.83 (0.58–1.18)
<1 litre 54 37,541 14.4 1 1 (reference)
≥1 litre 10 6,611 15.1 0.82 (0.40–1.67) 0.79 (0.39–1.62)
p-trend c      0.60
Wine      
0 156 115,296 13.5 1.50 (0.89–2.53) 1.47 (0.87–2.50)
<0.5 litre 19 18,636 10.2 1 1 (reference)
≥0.5 litre 10 3,254 30.7 3.18 (1.41–7.14) 2.95 (1.30–6.68)
p-trend c      0.65
Vodka, MIHDPS d     
0 14 11,298 12.4 1.22 (0.65–2.30) 1.20 (0.63–2.25)
<200 g 31 29,633 10.5 1 1 (reference)
≥200 g 97 67,291 14.4 1.42 (0.94–2.13) 1.25 (0.82–1.92)
p-trend c      0.55
Vodka, KRIS     
0 1 2,466 4.0 0.37 (0.04–3.29) 0.37 (0.04–3.36)
<100 g 4 3,929 10.2 1 1 (reference)
≥100 g 38 22,570 16.8 1.69 (0.60–4.79) 1.51 (0.52–4.36)
p-trend c      0.11
  1. aStratified by study. Mutually adjusted for the other two beverage types.
  2. bStratified by study and adjusted for smoking (never, former, ≤10 cig/day, 11–19 cig/day, ≥20 cig/day); education (primary, unfinished secondary, secondary, higher); BMI. Mutually adjusted for the other two beverage types. Age was used as the underlying time metric for all analyses.
  3. cTest for trend was carried out across three categories by fitting ordinal variable ‘amount per one occasion’ as continuous.
  4. dResults for MIHDPS and KRIS participants are presented separately due to differences in questionnaire design.