homework

Risk factors for lung cancer: a case-control study in Hong Kong women Author(s): Yuk-Lan Chiu, Xiao-Rong Wang, Hong Qiu and Ignatius Tak-Sun Yu Source: Cancer Causes & Control, Vol. 21, No. 5 (May 2010), pp. 777-785 Published by: Springer Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40645877 Accessed: 21-10-2021 00:16 UTC

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide

range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and

facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at

https://about.jstor.org/terms

Springer is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Cancer Causes & Control

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Cancer Causes Control (2010) 21:777-785 DOI 10.1007/s 10552-0 10-9506-9

ORIGINAL PAPER

Risk factors for lung cancer: a case-control study in Hong Kong women

Yuk-Lan Chiu · Xiao-Rong Wang · Hong Qiu · Ignatius Tak-Sun Yu

Received: 19 March 2009/ Accepted: 6 January 2010 /Published online: 19 January 2010 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Abstract To identify etiological connections of lung cancer in Chinese women in Hong Kong, who are among the highest in lung cancer incidence and mortality, we conducted a case-control study, in which 279 female lung cancer cases and 322 controls were selected and frequency matched. A variety of information, including dietary habits,

occupational history, smoking, domestic environmental exposures, and family history of cancer was collected, and their associations with lung cancer were analyzed with logistic analysis approach. In addition to positive associa- tions with exposures to cooking emissions and to radon at home, smoking and family cancer history, we observed that

increasing consumption of meat was linked to a higher risk,

whereas consumptions of vegetables had a strong protec- tive effect against lung cancer. Moderate consumption of coffee appeared to be beneficiai against the disease. Those never employed and domestic helpers were at a higher risk.

The results indicated that environmental exposures, risky personal behaviors, or lifestyle, as well as family cancer aggregation are among important contributors to the high incidence of lung cancer in Hong Kong females.

Keywords Lung cancer · Risk factors · Case-control study · Chinese women

Abbreviations ETS Environmental tobacco smoke

RRE Residential radon exposure ORs Odds ratios

Y.-L. Chiu - X.-R. Wang · H. Qiu · I. T.-S. Yu (El) School of Public Health and Primary Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, 4/F, School of Public Health, Prince

of Wales Hospital, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong SAR, China e-mail: [email protected]

Introduction

Lung cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality in Hong Kong women, accounting for about one-third of cancer deaths [1]. Its age standardized incidence rate reached the highest around the world in the early 1990s [2] and was only surpassed by US females in 2000 [3]. Apart from Hong Kong, the high incidence and mortality rate were also reported among Chinese women living in mainland China [4], as well as in other countries [5-7], indicating a consistent result in this ethnic group.

A number of epidemiological studies were conducted to explore possible causation of lung cancer, in which ciga- rette smoking was found to be a major culprit in Chinese men [8]. However, smoking cannot adequately explain the high incidence in Chinese females, due to the fact that smoking in Chinese women in Hong Kong and in mainland was so uncommon, ranging from 3 to 5% [9]. Obviously, there are some other known and unknown risk factors that

could be responsible for the excess risk among the population.

Lung cancer is a multifactor-causing disease, which may be related to both environmental exposures and genetic

factors. To gain a more complete understanding about the risk factors for lung cancer and provide a sensible expla- nation for the high risk among this ethnic population, we conducted a population-based case-control study in Hong Kong Chinese women, in which a variety of factors was examined, including environmental exposures, dietary factors, family cancer history, occupations, as well as active and passive smoking. In our previous data analysis using the same database, we evaluated the effects of exposure to cooking emissions and smoking on lung cancer [10, 11], both of which were found to be potent risk factors

in these women. In another recent report [12], we

α Springer

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

778 Cancer Causes Control (2010) 21:777-785 determined the associations of previous lung diseases and family cancer history with the occurrence of lung cancer. In the present analysis, we attempt to provide an overall picture of risk factors in the population using integrated data covering a wide range of variables including occu- pations and detailed dietary factors, which has been rarely done in addressing etiological issues of lung cancer in Hong Kong population.

Subjects and methods

The study was approved by the ethics committees of both the Chinese University of Hong Kong and Queen Elizabeth Hospital. Details of subject selection were described elsewhere [10]. Briefly, a total of 279 female patients aged 30-79 years were recruited from the largest oncology center in Hong Kong, with the criteria of newly diagnosed primary carcinomas of the lung (International Classifica- tion of Disease, Ninth Revision code 162) from 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2004. The cancer cases were confirmed histo-

logically according to the WHO histological typing of lung tumors [13]. At the same time, 322 control subjects were selected from the same residential areas from which the

cases were selected. The controls had no history of phy- sician-diagnosed cancer at any site and were frequency- matched to the cases in 10-year age groups.

Data collection

Person-to-person interview was administered using stan- dardized questionnaire in local dialect. The collected information included detailed active smoking history,

environmental tobacco smoking (ETS) exposures at home and at workplace, cooking practices since childhood, resi- dential radon exposure, family cancer history, dietary habits, occupations and education level.

Smoker was defined as one who had ever smoked more

than 20 packs of cigarettes in lifetime, or more than one cigarette a day, or more than one cigar a week for 1 year. ETS exposure was defined among nonsmokers as having lived or worked with smoker(s) for at least 1 year and was regularly exposed to tobacco smoke. Regular exposure was defined as at least 1 h a day. We further divided ETS exposure into three categories, i.e., exposure at either home

or work, at both home and work, and none at all.

We made a great effort to collect detailed information on cooking practice. A composite index - the cooking dish- years was constructed to quantify the regular cooking habits in terms of the frequency and the duration of cooking, as well as three cooking methods (stir-frying, frying, and deep-frying), as described previously [10]. One stir-frying dish-year means cooking one stir-fried dish daily

for a year. The total cooking dish-years was calculated by summing up the stir-frying dish-years, frying dish-years and deep-frying dish-years. The total cooking dish-years was used to express the amount of exposure to cooking emissions.

Exposure to radon at home was assessed based on detailed information about the lifetime residences (floor

level, building material and wall surface covering materi- als, building age, and window opening practices, according to information available from a territory-wide indoor radon

survey conducted in Hong Kong. The radon exposure was expressed as residential radon exposure index (RRE) [10]. In addition, information on diagnosed cancer in the lungs and any other site in first degree relatives (parents and siblings) and occupation, including job titles and job tasks according to the coding manual used for the Hong Kong Census [14] was gathered. Occupations were grouped into

four categories: (1) professional/clerical/sales, (2) never employed/domestic helper, (3) cleaners, and (4) construc- tion/industry/sewer workers.

In collection of data on diet, a reduced version of the

Diet History Questionnaire designed by the National Cancer Institute was used [15]. Subjects were asked about

their dietary habits during the past 5 years before the interview for controls, and prior to becoming ill for cases.

The data included the frequency and amount of eating following groups of foods: (1) dark green vegetables, (2) orange or yellow vegetables, (3) all kinds of meat, (4) all kinds of fresh fruits (total fruits), (5) pickled vegetables, (6)

supplement of multivitamins, and (7) coffee drink. Con- sumptions of the first three groups of food were quantified

as average numbers of servings (one serving = 80 gram) per day /week/month, while the second three groups were

expressed as the frequency of consumption. A coffee drinker was defined as one who drank at least one cup of

coffee per week for 6 months or more. Coffee drinking was

further quantified as cup-years, i.e., one cup-year means drinking one cup of coffee per day for 1 year.

Statistical analysis

Unconditional logistic regression was applied to estimate associations of potential risk factors with lung cancer. Basically, three models were constructed to obtain odds ratios (ORs) for lung cancer. The first model was to esti- mate the main effect of each of the potential risk factors adjusted by age (there was a residual confounding effect), employment and years of education. Smoking amount was categorized as less than 25 and 25 or more pack-years. Similarly to our previous practice [10, 11], exposure to cooking emissions was also categorized into four groups using intervals of 50-dish years. The group of professional/

clerical/sales workers who were assumed to be exposed to

α Springer

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Cancer Causes Control (2010) 21:777-785 779 minimum potential hazards associated with lung cancer served as reference group. The second model was con- structed to estimate the effects of smoking, total dish-years,

family cancer history, radon index, and occupations, where

all of these variables were included all at once, along with age, education, consumptions of total fruits, and vegeta- bles. The final model was constructed to estimate the

effects of dietary factors and coffee consumption, in which

all of the dietary variables and coffee consumption were included all at once. In addition, all of other variables that

were found to be significant predictors in the second model were included in the final models. All of the three models

were fit using data of all subjects and that of nonsmokers alone. In the latter case, ETS was adjusted as well.

Finally, we made an estimation of population attribut- able fraction (PAF) in all subjects and in nonsmokers, respectively, based on the following method: PAF - 1 - ]Γ ^ for multiple categorical variables [16], where Pi is the proportion of all cases that are in the stratum i, and

OR/ is an adjusted odds ratio in the stratum /.

PAF = ÎTT^u^î)for binary variables [17], where Pe is the prevalence of exposure in the control population and OR is an adjusted odds ratio for exposure to the indepen- dent variable under study.

Results

Average age was around 65 years for both case and control groups, and marital status was similar in the two groups (Table 1). There were significant differences between the two groups in education and employment, in which lower education levels and more never employment were seen in cases than in controls (p < 0.05). The majority of lung cancer cases were identified as adenocarcinoma (62%),

whereas squamous cell, large and small cell types accounted for a small proportion, respectively.

The values of total dish-years and radon index were

significantly higher in cases than in controls (Table 2). Likewise, smoking, heavy smoking (>25 pack-years) and family cancer history were more commonly seen in the cases. Total dish-years, smoking status, pack-years, and radon index were associated with increased risk of lung cancer. Furthermore, there were exposure-response trends in total dish-years and smoking pack-years (Table 2). Family history of lung cancer and any cancer also increased the risk. All of the associations remained statis-

tically significant when all of relevant factors were taken into account, while the association with radon index was

marginally significant. Among the four occupational cate- gories, more cases were found in the category of never employed/domestic helpers than the controls (27 vs. 16%). The adjusted OR in relation to never employed/domestic

Table 1 Demographic features in cases of lung cancer and controls

Cases (n = 279) Controls (n = 322)

Mean ageab, years 65.4 (10.6) 64.8 (10.6) Education (%)

>7 years 56 (20.4) 86 (26.7) <6 years 1 12 (40.7) 143 (44.4) Nil 107 (38.9) 93 (28.9)

Employment (%)

Yes 221 (80.1) 285 (88.5) No 55(19.9) 37(11.5)

Marital status (%)

Married 176 (63.8) 206 (64.0) Widowed 83 (30.0 104 (32.3) Single/divorced 17 (6.2) 12 (3.7)

Histological type (%)

Adenocarcinoma 172 (62.4) - Squamous cell 24 (8.6) Large call 10 (3.6) Small cell 9 (3.2) Unspecified 62 (22.2)

a Mean age at diagnosis (cases) or contact (controls)

b Standard deviation in parenthesis

helpers was 2.6 times, in comparison with clerical/sales workers. An upward risk was also seen in cleaners and other industrial workers. In the full model, all of the above

variables were adjusted each other, in addition to age, education, consumption of total fruits, and vegetables.

The above analyses were also performed in nonsmokers after 66 smoking cases and 30 smoking controls were excluded. A slightly elevated risk was observed in relation to ETS at either home or work (OR = 1.14, 95% CI, 0.68, 1.93) and at both home and work (OR = 1.30, 95% CI,

0.72, 2.35). The strength of associations with family cancer history, radon index, and occupations was approximate to that observed in all subjects. However, a greater risk was observed in cooking dish years in nonsmokers, which showed a clearer exposure-response trend (OR: 1.24, 95% CI: 0.96, 2.01 in the category of 51-100; OR: 2.82, 95% CI: 1.48, 5.35 in 101 -150; OR: 4.24, 95% CI: 2.12, 8.47 in

over 150).

In determination of the potential effects of dietary fac-

tors on lung cancer, a full model was constructed with all variables of the dietary factors along with age, employ- ment, education, total dish-years, smoking, family cancer history, and radon index. As shown in Table 3, a higher risk was seen in increasing consumption of meat. Con- sumption of 1 serving/day or more was related to a double risk of that below 1 serving/day. Pickled vegetables slightly elevated the risk. On the other hand, consumptions

of dark green vegetables and yellow/orange vegetables

4y Springer

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

780 Cancer Causes Control (2010) 21:777-785 Table 2 Main effects of selected risk factors in all subjects

Variables Prevalence (n, %)a Main effectb Full model0 Cases (n = 279) Controls (n = 322) ρ values OR (95% CI)d OR (95% CI)

Total dish-years 0.001<50 87 (3 1 .5) 1 34 (4 1 .7) 1 .00 1 .00 51-100 83 (31.0) 1 12 (34.9) 1.12 (0.75, 1.69) 1.12 (0.72, 1.74) 101-150 46(17.1) 45(14.0) 1.53(0.91,2.58) 1.87(1.05,3.30) >150 52(19.4) 30(9.4) 2.53(1.44,4.45) 2.87(1.56,5.29)Smoking <0.001No 213(76.3) 292(90.7) 1.00 1.00 Yes 66(23.7) 30(9.3) 3.02(1.84,4.95) 2.57(1.49,4.43)Pack-years <0.001 <25 30(10.8) 19(5.9) 2.18(1.16,4.08) 1.83(0.92,3.64) >25 34(12.2) 10(3.1) 4.61(2.17,9.76) 3.72(1.63,8.46)

Radon index 12.73 (1.57) 12.45 (1.23) 0.016 1.15 (1.02, 1.29) 1.12 (0.98, 1.27)Occupations 0.00 1Clerical/sales 23(8.2) 48(14.9) 1.00 1.00 Never employed/ 76 (27.3) 52 (16.1) 2.71 (1.40, 5.25) 2.64 (1.28, 5.48)

domestic helper

Cleaners 62(22.2) 65(20.2) 1.75 (0.90, 3.41) 2.24(1.08,4.65) Others6 1 1 8 (42.3) 1 57 (48.8) 1 .43 (0.79, 2.60) 1 .74 (0.90, 3.34)

a The numbers may vary with the variable categories due to some missing values

b Adjusted for age, employment, and years of education

c Full model included age, years of education, total dish-years, smoking, family cancer history, radon index, occupations, intake of total fruits,

and vegetables

d 95% confidence interval

e Others including all industry and sewer workers

were inversely related to lung cancer risk, both of which showed a gradient with increasing amount. A similar trend

was also observed in consumption of multivitamins, but the

number of subjects in either irregular or regular con- sumption was small. In addition, consumption of coffee ranging from 1 to 10 coffee-years significantly lowered the

risk. However, heavier drinkers, i.e., 10 or more coffee-

years, tended to be associated with a slightly increased risk.

When the similar full model was fit by restricting data to nonsmokers (data not shown), the directions and strengths of the above associations were approximate to those observed in all subjects. There was a slight difference seen in the effect of coffee consumption in nonsmokers: adjus- ted OR related to heavier coffee consumption was 1.62 (95% CI, 0.18, 0.78), somewhat greater than that obtained from all subjects, while a similar OR remained in the category of light coffee consumption (OR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.18, 0.78).

An estimate of population-attributable fraction in all study subjects revealed that about 27% of lung cancer could

be attributable to exposure to cooking emissions (Table 4). The fraction attributable to smoking, domestic radon expo-

sure, low vegetable intake, and family cancer history ranged

between 16 and 30%. In addition, about 9% of lung cancer could be explained by consumption of meat with 95% confidence interval of -20 and 29, indicating the point estimate was not stable. In the calculation that restricted to

lifetime nonsmokers, there was not much difference from

those obtained from all of the subjects, with the exception of

a higher fraction of lung cancer (35%) that could be attrib-

utable to exposure to cooking emission.

Discussion

Lung cancer is the leading neoplasm in many countries, in terms of both incidence and mortality. Although cigarette smoking is a major recognized cause, which accounts for 80-90% of lung cancer cases, only a small fraction of smokers (1-15%) develop lung cancer [18]. In this study, majority of the subjects were nonsmokers. Smoking cer- tainly cannot fully explain the high incidence and mortality

of lung cancer experienced by Chinese women in Hong Kong. Clearly, other etiological factors can independently (in the absence of smoking) or jointly (in conjunction with smoking) cause lung cancer [19]. In our previous analyses

ß Springer

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Cancer Causes Control (2010) 2 1 :777-785 78 1 Table 3 Main effects of dietary factors in all subjects

Variables Prevalence (w, %)a Main effect0 Full model0 Cases (n = 279) Controls (n = 322) ρ values OR (95% CI)d OR (95% CI)

Intake of meat 0.012 <1 serving/day 40(14.6) 69(21.5) 1.00 1.00 >l-2 serving/day 160 (58.4) 151 (47.0) 2.02 (1.22, 3.33) 2.69 (1.55, 4.68) >2 serving/day 74(27.0) 101(31.5) 1.49(0.86,2.57) 2.10(1.15,3.84) Intake of pickled vegetables 0.1 15 <1 time/month 68(25.0) 100(31.2) 1.00 1.00 1-3 times/month 119 (43.8) 142 (44.2) 1.18 (0.77, 1.81) 1.16 (0.73, 1.85) >1 time/week 85 (31.2) 79 (24.6) 1.25 (0.77, 2.01) 1.27 (0.75, 2.14) Intake of dark green vegetables <0.001 <1 serving/day 64(22.9) 39(12.1) 1.00 1.00 >l-2 serving/day 77 (27.6) 67 (20.8) 0.83 (0.47, 1.46) 0.88 (0.48, 1.61) >2 serving/day 133 (47.7) 216 (67.1) 0.45 (0.28, 0.75) 0.51 (0.29, 0.88)

Intake of yellow/orange vegetables <0.001 <1 serving/week 146(52.3) 93(28.9) 1.00 1.00 >l-2 serving/week 77 (327.6) 1 14 (35.4) 0.45 (0.30, 0.69) 0.48 (0.31, 0.76) >2 serving/week 52 (18.6) 113 (35.1) 0.35 (0.22, 0.55) 0.41 (0.25, 0.67)Intake of total fruit 0.004 <1 time/day 85 (30.8) 72 (22.4) 1.00 1.00 1 time/day 126 (45.7) 137 (42.5) 0.95 (0.62, 1.47) 0.98 (0.61, 1.58) >2 times/day 65 (23.5) 1 13 (35.1) 0.62 (0.38, 1.00) 0.81 (0.47, 1.38) Supplemental multi vitamins 0.019Never 245(92.1) 267(84.5) 1.00 1.00 Irregularly 9 (3.4) 15 (4.8) 0.76 (0.30, 1.90) 0.70 (0.25, 1.94) Regularly 12 (4.5) 34 (10.7) 0.43 (0.21, 0.89) 0.38 (0.17, 0.82)Coffee consumption 0.005Never 211(77.0) 246(76.7) 1.00 1.00 1-10 coffee-years 22 (8.0) 47 (14.6) 0.43 (0.23, 0.79) 0.41 (0.21, 0.78) >10 coffee-years ' 41 (15.0) 28 (8.7) 1.36 (0.77, 2.43) 1.30 (0.70, 2.42)

a The numbers may vary with the variable categories due to some missing values

b Adjusted for age, employment, and years of education

c All variables in the table were put in the model all at once, along with adjustment for age, employment, years of education, total dish-years,

smoking, family cancer history, and radon index. d95% confidence interval

[10, 11], we found that smoking and exposure to cooking

emission were potent risk factors for lung cancer in the Hong Kong women, in which the two factors appeared to act independently. We also observed that a positive family history of any cancer was associated with over twofold risk

of a negative family history [12]. The present analysis reconfirmed the associations, while additional factors, such

as dietary habits, occupations, and exposure to radon at home were adjusted simultaneously. The current study further suggested that the exposure to cooking fume might

explain about 26% of lung cancer occurring in the whole group, and 35% in nonsmoking women. Nearly 16% of lung cancer could be attributable to cigarette smoking, and

about 22% to residential exposure to radon. More impor-

tantly, this study evaluated the roles of dietary habit and

occupations in the development of lung cancer, while taking into account of all other factors, such as smoking, exposure to cooking emission, and family cancer history. The results added additional information to help under-

stand lung cancer etiology in Hong Kong women. The link of dietary factors to lung cancer as well as other

cancers has been increasingly addressed [20, 21]. Diet is believed to play a major role in cancer etiology and pre- vention. However, few studies were available with respect

to which specific dietary factors are most closely linked to

lung cancer in Chinese population. In this study, we col- lected detailed dietary data in both frequency and quanti- tative assessment. We found inverse associations of lung

cancer with vegetables, multivitamins, and moderate con- sumption of coffee, and a positive association with total

Ö Springer

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

782 Cancer Causes Control (2010) 21:777-785 Table 4 Population-attributable fractiona of lung cancer associated with risk factors

Risk factors Population-attributable fraction (95% CI)b

All subjects Nonsmoking subjects

Total dish-yearsc 26.5 (12.4, 36.4) 34.9 (22.3, 43.5)

Smoking 15.8 (7.2, 26.9) Residential radon 22.5 (3.5, 36.1) 21.6 (0, 36.4) Low vegetable intake 29.9 (8.8, 44.2) 30.7 (8.6, 45.2)

Family cancer history 15.8 (6.4, 27.1) 16.0 (5.8, 28.3)

a Adjusted for age, years of education, occupations, and intake of total fruit. In addition, total dish-years, smoking, family cancer his-

tory, radon index, and vegetables were adjusted each other. The least

exposed (total dish-years, residential radon, low vegetable intake) and

no exposed (smoking, family cancer history) were reference groups

b 95% confidence interval

c One dish-year means cooking one stir-fried dish daily for a year

meat. These associations were independent of other risk factors or confounders being considered. In addition, we observed a favorable effect of increasing intake of total fruits and an adverse effect of pickled vegetables, which were consistent with a previous Hong Kong study [22], though neither of them was significant.

Intake of vegetables, including dark green and yellow/ orange vegetables, was found to be related inversely to the

risk of lung cancer. There appeared a stronger association with yellow/orange vegetables, showing lower odds ratios with increasing intake amount. Intake 1 or more serving per week might be related to a reduced risk by half, in comparison with intake less than 1 serving per week. The result was in line with the previous studies showing that individuals with high dietary intake of vegetables had a

lower risk for lung cancer than those with low vegetables intake [21]. Low vegetable intake was found to contribute 30% to the cancer risk in this population. Fruits and veg- etables are the major dietary source of antioxidant micro- nutrients, such as vitamin A, vitamin C, lycopene, beta- carotene, lutein [23, 24]. Epidemiological data generally indicated a stronger protective association for fruits than vegetable consumption [25]. In this study, we did not observe a stronger association with fruits, however. A

possible explanation might be that the sample size was not big enough given the wide range of confidence intervals. Further studies with larger sample sizes are necessary to confirm the association of fruits with lung cancer in Hong

Kong women.

Intake of multivitamins was also found to be inversely associated with lung cancer risk, in which regular intake had a stronger effect than irregular intake. Anticarcino- genic effects of vitamin A, C, D, and Ε have been sug- gested in both population studies and experimental studies [25-27]. The evidence for intake of vitamin C and a variety

of carotenoids or antioxidant index suggested protective associations [28]. It should be pointed out, however, that there were only a small number of the women who took

vitamin supplement in this study. Therefore, caution should

be given to the interpretation of the result.

Meat intake was another dietary factor found to be associated with lung cancer. The risk in those who ate one serving or more (over 80 g) per day was more than twofold

of that in those eating less. The positive association with meat consumption was consistent with some other studies

conducted in different populations [29, 30]. Most previous studies showed a moderately elevated risk that was asso- ciated with higher intake of fat, meat, or cholesterol [30-32], based on which the World Cancer Research Fund

(WCRF) concluded that diets high in total fat, saturated/ animal fat, and cholesterol possibly increase the risk of lung cancer [25]. In our study, meat intake could explain approximating 9% of lung cancer. It was worthwhile to point out that the variable of meat intake in this study referred to all kinds of meat intake, including red meat, poultry, and seafood. It has been suggested the link between fat and cancer risk depends on the type of fat consumed rather than total fat intake [28]. Consumption of

red meat was especially thought to be linked to lung cancer

and other cancers [33]. Therefore, the association between

(red) meat intake and lung cancer might have been diluted in our study because of all kinds of meat consumption included. The Population Attributable Fraction could be bigger if only red meat intake was considered. Unfortu-

nately, we were not able to separate the effect of red meat

intake from others with the current data. It certainly deserves to be addressed in the future studies. The mech-

anism for the positive association with high meat intake has

not been clearly understood, but mutagens and carcino- gens, especially compounds known as heterocyclic amines (HCAs), has been identified in meats cooked at high tem- peratures [34, 35], which may be responsible for increasing

lung cancer risk.

The link of coffee consumption to lung cancer was another interesting finding. The light drinking (1-10 cof- fee-years) was associated with a decreased risk, while slightly elevated risk was seen in heavier drinking. Previ- ous studies reported a beneficial effect of consumption of coffee, especially decaffeinated coffee, on breast cancer [36] and colorectal cancer [37]. On the other hand, caffeine

was found to have a carcinogenic effect and might elevate cancer risk [38, 39]. Among a limited number of studies examining coffee consumption and lung cancer, some suggested elevated risks associated with increasing coffee consumption [40]. A few studies, however, reported that consumption of decaffeinated coffee was associated with a statistically decreased risk of lung cancer, which indicated a protective effect against lung cancer [41, 42]. We

ß Springer

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Cancer Causes Control (2010) 21:777-785 783 detected an inverse relationship with moderate coffee

consumption. Nevertheless, there were only a small num- ber of coffee drinkers and no detailed information on the

types of coffee consumed by each subject; hence, it pro- hibited us to draw a conclusion based on the current data. A

further study addressing the association of coffee con- sumption with lung cancer would be worthwhile.

Lung cancer is the most common one among cancers that are associated with occupational exposures [43]. The

proportion of lung cancer contributable to occupational exposures has been suggested to range from 9 to 15% [28].

The association between lung cancer and occupational history in women has not been studied as extensively as in

men. Among a limited number of studies, certain occupa- tions were linked to increase lung cancer risk in females,

including cleaners, construction workers, metal product workers, rubber/plastic product makers, and sewer workers

[44^6]. A recent cohort study conducted in nonsmoking women in Shanghai, China [47] found an excess risk of lung cancer in painters and rubber workers, though overall

exposure to known or suspected occupational lung carcinogens was not associated with lung cancer risk. In our study, we observed an elevated risk in cleaners and industrial workers including sewer workers. The associa- tion in cleaners was in accord with the previous studies, in

which cleaning service was linked to increased lung cancer risk [44, 45], possibly due to exposure to certain organic solvents that have a carcinogenic effect. For industrial workers, a wide range of carcinogens identified in different

industries has been suggested [28, 47]. We did not classify job matrix and potential exposures specifically in this study

due to the limited number of subjects.

It was also worthwhile to note that among the four cate-

gories of occupations, the greatest risk was seen in the never

employed and domestic helpers. The result was persistent in

the analysis either among all subjects or among nonsmokers

alone. A possible explanation might be that housewives and domestic helpers were exposed more heavily to cooking emissions because they usually involved more cooking practice at home. A stratifying analysis of cooking practice

displayed that the cases in never employed women had the highest total dish-years (1 18 dish-years), in comparison with

other employed women (ranging from 52 to 86 dish-years).

The result, in turn, corroborated the importance of cooking

fumes as a risk factor for lung cancer. Residential radon is another environmental risk factor

being studied. A substantially higher excess relative risk of

lung cancer was linked to residential radon gas exposure [48, 49]. The current data also suggested an increased risk associated with residential radon exposure, though the association was marginally significant when all of other factors were adjusted. About 22% of lung cancer could be attributable to residential exposure to radon. However, we

need to point out that the radon exposure level was esti-

mated, not measured directly in this study, which might have resulted in a nondifferential misclassification of the

exposure and lead to an underestimation of the association. As in most case-control studies, selection bias could be a

concerned issue in this study. Our cases were drawn from the

largest oncology center and the participation rate reached up

to 96%. The control subjects were selected from the same community where cases came from. The procedure was unlikely to introduce substantial selection bias. Recall bias

would be another major concern for such a study, which might cause differential misclassification of exposures. To minimize the possibility of differential recall from awareness

of disease status, we introduced the study to the subjects as a

general "women health study". However, nondifferential recall errors were likely present, as all of the information on

individual exposures and dietary habits were obtained

through questionnaires. Nondifferential recall bias might have led to underestimated associations. Another limitation

of this study was that we did not assess the effects of the various factors in smokers alone due to a small number in this

category. It was likely that smokers and nonsmokers were

etiologically distinct in lung cancer. Inadequate study power

prevented us from assessing the distinction between smokers

and nonsmokers. However, the analysis with combined data

of smokers and nonsmokers allowed us evaluating the role of

smoking in lung cancer among these subjects.

In summary, this study provided additional under- standing of possibly etiological links of various factors

with lung cancer among Chinese women in Hong Kong. In addition to the well-established smoking effect, environ-

mental exposures, including exposures to cooking emis- sions and radon at home, and family cancer history are

contributing factors to lung cancer. Moreover, consump- tions of meat, too little consumption of vegetables/fruits and multivitamins may increase lung cancer risk. Moderate

consumption of coffee appears to have a beneficial effect.

The findings highlight the importance and necessity of initiating/strengthening education programs that should focus on individual behavior and dietary habit changes in prevention and control of lung cancer in a population level.

Acknowledgments The work described in this paper was substan- tially supported by a grant from the Research Grants Council of the

Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China (Project No. CUHK4103/02M).

References

1 . Hong Kong Cancer Registry (2002) Cancer Stat 2000. Hospital Authority, Hong Kong

2. Department of Health (1994) Coronary heart disease and lung cancer. Department of Health Hong Kong, Hong Kong, pp 33-49

α Springer

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

784 Cancer Causes Control (2010) 21:777-785 3. International Agency for Research on Cancer (200 1 ) GLOBOCAN

2000: Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence Worldwide. Available at httpV/www-dep.iarc.fr/globocan/globocan.htm. IARC. Accessed July 6, 2004

4. International Agency tor Research on Cancer (1987) Cancer incidence in five continents, vol 5. IARC, Lyon

5. MacLennan R, Da Costa J, Day NE, Law CH, Ng YK, Shan- mugaratnam Κ (1977) Risk factors for lung cancer in Singapore Chinese, a population with high female incidence rates. Int J Cancer 20:854-860

6. Hinds MW, Stemmermann GN, Yang HY, Kolonel LN, Lee J, Wegner E (1981) Differences in lung cancer risk from smoking among Japanese, Chinese and Hawaiian women in Hawaii. Int J Cancer 27:297-302

7. Kono S, Isa AR, Ogimoto I, Yoshimura Τ (1987) Cause-specific mortality among Koreans, Chinese and Americans in Japan, 1973-1982. Int J Epidemiol 16:415-419

8. Liu BQ, Peto R, Chen ZM, Boreham J, Wu YP, Li JY, Campbell TC, Chen JS (1998) Emerging tobacco hazards in China: 1. Retrospective proportional mortality study of one million deaths. BMJ 317:1411-1422

9. Lam WK (2005) Lung cancer in Asian women - the environment and genes. Respirology 10:408-417

1 0. Yu ITS, Chiu YL, Au JSK, Wong TW, Tang JL (2006) Dose-response

relationship between cooking fumes exposures and lung cancer among Chinese nonsmokers women. Cancer Res 66:4961^967

11. Wang XR, Chiu Y, Qiu H, Au J, Yu IT (2009) The roles of smoking and cooking emissions in lung cancer risk among Chi- nese women in Hong Kong. Ann Oncol 20:746-751

12. Wang XR, Yu ITS, Chiu YL, Qiu H, Fu Z, Goggins W, Au JSK, Tse LA, Wong TW (2009) Previous pulmonary disease and family cancer history increase the risk of lung cancer among Hong Kong women. Cancer Cause & Control 20:757-763

13. World Health Organization (1982) The World Health Organiza- tion histological typing of lung tumors. Second edition. Am J Clin Pathol 77:123-136

14. Hong Kong Census and Statistics Department (1981) Hong Kong 1981 Land Census Coding Manual. Hong Kong Government, Hong Kong, pp 33-39

15. National Cancer Institute (2002) NCI's diet history questionnaire,

DHQ-1 . httpV/riskfactor.cancer.gov/DHQ/forms/files/shared/dhq 1 . Accessed June 7, 2002

16. Bruzzi P, Green SB, Byar DP, Brinton LA, Schairer C (1985) Estimating the population attributable risk for multiple risk fac-

tors using case-control data. Am J Epi 122:904-914 17. Schlesselman JJ (1982) Case-control studies. Oxford University

Press, New York, NY 18. Alberg AJ, Samet JM (2003) Epidemiology of lung cancer. Chest

123(suppl 1):21S-49S 19. Ahsan H, Thomas DC (2004) Lung cancer etiology. Independent

and joint effects of genetics, tobacco, and arsenic. JAMA 292:3026-3029

20. Sjuladottir H, Tjoenneland A, Overvad Κ et al (2004) Does insufficient adjustment for smoking explain the preventive effects

of fruits and vegetables on lung cancer? Lung Cancer 45:1-10 21. Alberg AJ, Samet JM (2005) Epidemiology of lung cancer. In:

Sadler MJ, Caballero Β, Strain JJ (eds) Encyclopedia of human nutrition. Academic Press, London, UK, pp 272-284

22. Chan-Yeung M, Koo LC, Ho JC, Tsang KW, Chau WS, Chiu SW, Ip MS, Lam WK (2003) Risk factors associated with lung cancer in Hong Kong. Lung Cancer 40:131-140

23. Steinmetz ΚΑ, Potter JD (1996) Vegetables, fruit, and cancer prevention: a review. J Am Diet Assoc 96:1027-1039

24. Smith- Warner SA, Spiegelman D, Yaun SS et al (2003) Fruits, vegetables and lung cancer: a pooled analysis of cohort studies. IntJ Cancer 107:1001-1011

25. World Cancer Research Fund (1997) Food, Nutrition and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. American Institute for Cancer Research, Washington DC, pp 130-147

26. de Klerk NH, Musk AW, Ambrosini GL, Eccles JL, Hansen J, Olsen Ν, Watts VL, Lund HG, Pang SC, Beilby J, Hobbs MS (1998) Vitamin A and cancer prevention II: comparison of the effects of retinol and beta-carotene. Int J Cancer 75:362- 367

27. Garland CF, Garland FC, Gorham ED, Lipkin M, Newmark H, Mohr SB, Holick MF (2006) The role of vitamin D in cancer prevention. Am J of Pub Health 96:9-18

28. Alberg AJ, Ford JG, Samet JM (2007) Epidemiology of lung cancer. ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition). Chest 132:29S-55S

29. Deneo-Pellegnni H, De Stefani E, Ronco A, Mendilaharsu M, Carzoglio JC (1996) Meat consumption and risk of lung cancer; a

case-control study from Uruguay. Lung Cancer 14:195-205 30. Breslow RA, Graubard BI, Sinha R, Subar AF (2000) Diet and

lung cancer mortality: a 1987 national health interview survey cohort study. Cancer Causes Control 11:419-431

31. Goodman MT, Kolonel LN, Yoshizawa CN, Hankin JH (1988) The effect of dietary cholesterol and fat on the risk of lung cancer in Hawaii. Am J Epidemiol 128:1241-1255

32. Jain M, Burch JD, Howe GR, Risch HA, Miller AB (1990) Dietary factors and risk of lung cancer: results from a case- control study, Toronto, 1981-1985. Int J Cancer 45:287-293

33. Greenwald P, Clifford CK, Milner JA (2001) Diet and cancer prevention. Euro J Cancer 37:948-965

34. Berg I, Overvik E, Gustafsson JA (1990) Effect on cooking time on mutagen formation in smoke, crust and pan residue from pan-

broiled pork. Food Chem Toxicol 28:421-426 35. Thiebaud HP, Knize MG, Kuzmicky PA, Hsieh DP, Felton JS

(1995) Airborne mutagens produced by frying beef, pork and a soy-based food. Food Chem Toxicol 33:821-828

36. Baker JA, Beehler GP, Sawant AC, Jayaprakash V, McCann SE, Moysich KB (2006) Consumption of coffee, but not black tea, is associated with decreased risk of premenopausal breast cancer. Nutr Epidemiol 136:166-171

37. Lee KJ, Inoue M, Otani T, Iwasaki M, Sasazuki S, Tsugane S, JPHC Study Group (2007) Coffee consumption and risk of colorectal cancer in a population-based prospective cohort of Japanese men and women. Int J Cancer 121:1312-1318

38. Ito K, Nakazato T, Miyakawa Y, Yamato K, Ikeda Y, Kizaki M (2003) Caffeine induces G2/M arrest and apoptosis via a novel p53-dependent pathway in NB4 promyelocytic leukemia cells. JCellPhysiol 196:176-283

39. Terry KL, Titus-Ernstoff L, Garner EO, Vitonis AF, Cramer DW

(2003) Interaction between CYP1A1 polymorphic variants and dietary exposures influencing ovarian cancer risk. Cancer Epi- demiol Biomarkers Prev 12:187-190

40. Stensvold I, Jacobsen BK (1994) Coffee and cancer: a prospec- tive study of 43, 000 Norwegian men and women. Cancer Causes Control 5:401-408

41. Mettlin C (1989) Milk drinking, other beverage habits, and lung cancer risk. Int J of Cancer 43:608-612

42. Baker JA, McCann SE, Reid ME, Nowell S, Beehler GP, Moysich KB (2005) Associations between black tea and coffee consumption and risk of lung cancer among current and former smokers. Nutr Cancer 52:15-21

43. Doll R, Peto R (1981) The causes of cancer: quantitative esti- mates of avoidable risks of cancer in the United States today. J Natl Cancer Inst 66:1 191-1308

44. Brownson RC, Alavanja MC, Chang JC (1993) Occupational risk factors for lung cancer among nonsmoking women: a case-con- trol study in Missouri (United States). Cancer Causes Control 4:449-454

Ö Springer

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms

Cancer Causes Control (2010) 21:777-785 785 45. Jahn I, Ahrens W, Bruske-Hohlfeld I et al (1999) Occupational

risk factors for lung cancer in women: results of a case-control

study in Germany. Am J Ind Med 36:90-100 46. Wu-Williams AH, Xu ZY, Blot WJ, Dai XD, Louie R, Xiao HP,

Stone BJ, Sun XW, Yu SF, Feng YP, Fraumeni JF, Henderson BE

(1993) Occupation and lung cancer risk among women in northern China. Am J Ind Med 24:67-79

47. Pronk A, Coble J, Ji B-T, Shu X-O, Rothman N, Yang G, Gao T-T, Zheng W, Chow W-H (2009) Occupational risk of lung

cancer among lifetime non-smoking women in Shanghai, China.

Occup Environ Med 66:672-678 48. Field RW, Steck DJ, Smith BJ, Brus CP, Fisher EL, Neuberger

JS, Platz CE, Robinson RA, Woolson RF, Lynch C (2000) Res- idential radon gas exposure and lung cancer. The Iowa radon lung

cancer study. Am J Epidem 151:1091-1102 49. Wang Z, Lubin JH, Wang L et al (2002) Residential radon and

lung cancer risk in a high exposure area of Gansu Province, China. Am J Epidem 155:554-564

^ Springer

This content downloaded from 130.212.18.96 on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 00:16:04 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms