Hostname: page-component-6d856f89d9-nr6nt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-16T06:12:06.513Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Does coffee, tea and caffeine consumption reduce the risk of incident breast cancer? A systematic review and network meta-analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Shu Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang110016, People’s Republic of China
Xiang Li
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang110016, People’s Republic of China
Yue Yang
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang110016, People’s Republic of China
Jingping Xie
Affiliation:
Office of Retirement, Affiliated Hospital of Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shenyang, People’s Republic of China
Mingyue Liu
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang110016, People’s Republic of China
Ya Zhang
Affiliation:
College of Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, Shenyang, People’s Republic of China
Yingshi Zhang*
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang110016, People’s Republic of China
Qingchun Zhao*
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, No. 103 Wenhua Road, Shenyang110016, People’s Republic of China
*
*Corresponding authors: Email syzys1990@sina.com;zhaoqingchun1967@163.com
*Corresponding authors: Email syzys1990@sina.com;zhaoqingchun1967@163.com
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective:

We aimed to evaluate the association between coffee and/or tea consumption and breast cancer (BC) risk among premenopausal and postmenopausal women and to conduct a network meta-analysis.

Design:

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Setting:

We conducted a systematic review of electronic publications in the last 30 years to identify case–control studies or prospective cohort studies that evaluated the effects of coffee and tea intake.

Results:

Forty-five studies that included more than 3 323 288 participants were eligible for analysis. Network meta-analysis was performed to determine the effects of coffee and/or tea consumption on reducing BC risk in a dose-dependent manner and differences in coffee/tea type, menopause status, hormone receptor and the BMI in subgroup and meta-regression analyses. According to the first pairwise meta-analysis, low-dose coffee intake and high-dose tea intake may exhibit efficacy in preventing ER(estrogen receptor)− BC, particularly in postmenopausal women. Then, we performed another pairwise and network meta-analysis and determined that the recommended daily doses were 2–3 cups/d of coffee or ≥5 cups/d of tea, which contained a high concentration of caffeine, particularly in postmenopausal women.

Conclusions:

Coffee and tea consumption is not associated with a reduction in the overall BC risk in postmenopausal women and is associated with a potentially lower risk of ER− BC. And the highest recommended dose is 2–3 cups of coffee/d or ≥5 cups of tea/d. They are potentially useful dietary protectants for preventing BC.

Type
Review Article
Copyright
© Shenyang Pharmaceutical University, Affiliated Hospital of Liaoning University of Traditional Chinese Medicine and The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Nutrition Society

Breast cancer (BC) is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in women worldwide(Reference Siegel, Miller and Jemal1) and the secondary leading cause of death. In the twenty-first century, malignancy is expected to be the primary barrier to increasing life expectancy and decreasing the per capita death rate in each country and region(Reference Bray, Ferlay and Soerjomataram2). Although the 5-year recurrence rate is not high in patients with BC(Reference Tallet, Racadot and Boher3), these patients require long-term medication and regular examinations, the sensitivity of chemotherapy and radiotherapy is poor when the tumour recurs and recurrence is accompanied by a high mortality rate(Reference Dando, Pozza and Ambrosini4Reference Puig, Tenbaum and Chicote5). Therefore, we anticipate being able to prevent the incidence of BC through lifestyle changes.

Coffee is generally divided into regular coffee and decaffeinated coffee, and tea is mainly divided into three types, green tea, black tea and oolong tea, which are the most popular drinks worldwide. Recently, some studies have been reported a relationship between coffee and/or tea intake with tumourigenesis, such as BC, stomach cancer, colorectal cancer and glioma(Reference Creed, Smith-Warner and Gerke6Reference Poorolajal, Moradi and Mohammadi8).

Coffee is the major dietary source of caffeine, which also includes diterpene and polyphenols; tea also contains caffeine, as well as tea polyphenols and epigallocatechin 3-gallate. All of the above may have anticancer effect, while caffeine may influence BC mechanisms a lot, caffeine interacts with the PI3K/AKT inhibitory kinase signalling pathway, indicating that caffeine may play important roles in tumour pathogenesis, metastasis and prognosis(Reference Tenbaum, Ordóñez-Morán and Puig9). However, the roles of coffee and/or tea consumption in reducing the risk of incident BC remain controversial. Although some published meta-analyses have shown that coffee and tea potentially reduce the risk of BC(Reference Wang, Zhao and Chong10Reference Lafranconi, Micek and De Paoli11), other studies reached the opposite conclusion(Reference Yaghjyan, Colditz and Rosner12) and the recommended dosage was not conclusive.

The objective of our current research was to determine the most suitable population and recommended daily dosage intake for coffee and tea that would effectively prevent BC, which could also assist in clinical prevention. No previous systematic review has provided a comprehensive overview by performing a meta-regression and Bayesian network meta-analysis of this current topic.

Materials and methods

This systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis followed the guidelines of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses extension statement(Reference Hutton, Salanti and Caldwell13). We registered the pre-established protocol for this trial with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with prospective registry number CRD42020177945(14).

Search strategy and study selection

The publication search strategy, selection of eligible studies, data extraction, risk of bias assessment and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) were conducted by two independent researchers (WS and LX), and any controversies were resolved by discussion with an experienced reviewer (ZYS or ZQC). We searched PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library to identify potentially eligible studies published in the last 30 years up to April 2020 with original search terms of coffee or tea and the risk of BC and breast carcinoma but no language restrictions (see the details in online supplementary material, Supplemental Table 1). Eligible studies evaluated coffee and/or tea consumption for the risk of incident BC with their MeSH terms. Manual searches using reference lists in similar publications of each potential studies were also conducted. Potential publications analysed the association of coffee or tea consumption with the risk of incident BC, compared dose–response correlations or non-coffee and tea groups and were either case–control studies or prospective cohort studies.

Meaningful baseline characteristics were extracted using preset tables. For studies comparing dose–response correlations, the first author, publication year, project name, country and region, research type, tested consumption, subject type, sample size, age, BMI, alcohol intake, height, smoking, family history of BC and hormone therapy have been extracted. In addition, for studies which compared with non-coffee and tea group, first author, publication year, country and region, research type, tested consumption, subject type, sample size, age, BMI, alcohol intake, smoking, family history of BC, previous history of benign breast diseases and hormone therapy have been extracted.

Data extraction, risk of bias assessment and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation

The data were extracted using preset charts, and the baseline data and risk of incident BC were both extracted. For studies comparing dose–response correlations, the baseline data recorded the highest dose and the lowest dose of coffee or tea consumption, while the baseline data were extracted from studies comparing the regular coffee/tea group with a non-coffee and tea group. Additionally, the non-adjusted and adjusted values for effect size were extracted for the risk of incident BC, and the main adjusted values for effect size of were marked. Moreover, dichotomous outcomes of incident BC were also been extracted from all available studies. Therefore, we used the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale(Reference Wells, Shea and O’Connell15) to assess the risk of bias of both prospective cohort studies and case-controlled studies, and a Newcastle–Ottawa Scale score > 4 was considered acceptable quality and a score > 7 was considered high quality. We also used GRADE scales(Reference Guyatt, Oxman and Vist16) to evaluate the quality of the outcomes as high, moderate, low and very low.

Data synthesis and statistical analysis

In our systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis, we mainly considered the dose–response relationship between coffee/tea consumption and the risk of recurrent or new primary BC. We preset 0–2 cups/d coffee or tea intake as low consumption, 3–4 cups/d coffee or tea intake as moderate consumption, ≥5 cups/d coffee or tea intake as high consumption and a dose that was not mentioned as regular consumption. We also examined the differences in coffee/tea types, menopause status, hormone receptor status and BMI in subgroup analyses and meta-regression analyses to determine the most suitable level of coffee or tea consumption.

For both hazard ratios (HR) with their 95 % CI from effect size data and OR with their 95 % CI from dichotomous data, we are using ln(HR) for the accuracy of the data. Pairwise meta-analyses of heterogeneity were conducted when the I 2 statistic was > 25 % or the P value was < 0·10, and regardless of the results of the heterogeneity test, random effects models were applied to assess accuracy. Additionally, the P value for the source of heterogeneity was <0·05 from a meta-regression analysis(Reference Yang, Gong and Jin17). Moreover, publication bias was assessed with Begg’s test and Egger’s test, and a value < 0·05 indicates the existence of publication bias. Correlation coefficients were obtained from the average of available correlation coefficients per result.

Additionally, we performed a Bayesian random-effects network meta-analysis composed of four chains with 100 000 iterations after an initial burn-in of 10 000 and a thinning of 2·5 to determine the best recommended dose of caffeine intake (from coffee or tea). We calculated the HR and OR and corresponding 95 % credible intervals, and mean rank and surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values(Reference Feng, Jiang and Jia18) were produced from network meta-analysis estimates with a consistency model. All the aforementioned analyses were performed with StataMP version 14.0 and WinBUGS version 1.4.3.

Results

Description of included studies

Figure 1 shows the flow chart of identified potential publications and details of the study selection process. We initially identified 928 records, and after subsequently removing duplicates and screening titles and abstracts, we assessed 113 full-text articles. After removing sixty-eight articles that were not suitable for inclusion, forty-five original articles (3 323 288 participants)(Reference Sánchez-Quesada, Romanos-Nanclares and Navarro19Reference Inoue, Tajima and Mizutani63) were eligible for the systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis (Table 1). Among those studies, thirty-eight evaluated coffee consumption and the risk of BC in 3 058 893 participants, while seventeen evaluated tea consumption and the risk of BC in 264 395 subjects. Additionally, twenty-eight articles analysed the dose–response correlations and seventeen studies compared the preventative efficacy with non-coffee/tea group; details of each publication are shown in online supplementary material, Supplemental Tables 23. A baseline analysis of the highest dose compared with lowest dose of coffee/tea intake in articles examining the dose–response correlations revealed that the highest dose of coffee/tea consumption may be accompanied by a lower BMI, higher alcohol intake and smoking rate. The comparison of the regular coffee/tea consumption group with non-coffee/tea group revealed that the regular consumption group may also exhibit a lower BMI in the pairwise baseline meta-analysis. Moreover, twenty studies were case–control studies, while twenty-five were prospective cohort studies, and only one of those was defined as a low-quality study based on the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale score (see online supplementary material, Supplemental Tables 45).

Fig. 1 Procedure used to select studies examining coffee and tea consumption and the breast cancer risk

Table 1 Summary of the baseline main characteristics of coffee and tea consumption and the breast cancer risk

* Significant differences.

Dose–response relationship between coffee/tea consumption

The relationship between coffee consumption and BC risk was evaluated in a dose–response manner (Table 2). Low, moderate and high coffee consumption reduce the risk of incident BC, based on the effect size of HR data and significant differences, either from non-adjusted and adjusted values for effect size (the first column) or from most adjusted values for effect size (the second column), accompanied by low heterogeneity. Therefore, we postulate that HR data from most adjusted values for effect size (the second column) were more accurate, and starting with low-dose coffee consumption might prevent BC.

Table 2 Ln(HR) and their 95 % CI of breast cancer risks according to low, moderate and high coffee consumption obtained from the subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis of the coffee type, menopause status, hormone receptor status and BMI

ER, estrogen receptor; PR, progesterone receptor.

* Significant differences.

Existence heterogeneity.

Source of heterogeneity from meta-regression.

§ Publication bias.

According to the subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis of the coffee type, menopause status, hormone receptor status and BMI, significant differences often appeared in the subgroups of total coffee in coffee type, postmenopausal status in menopause status and the ER(estrogen receptor)−/PR(progesterone receptor)− status in the hormone receptor status. Sensitivity analysis did not find any single study that had a significant impact on the overall results (online supplementary material, Supplemental Fig. 1). Additionally, the meta-regression analysis produced similar results, because the P value was frequently < 0·05. In these pairwise meta-analyses, publication bias is generally not high and the GRADE quality of outcomes was acceptable (Table 2).

The relationship between the BC risk and tea consumption was also evaluated in a dose–response manner (Table 3) by conducting a subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis of the type of tea, menopause status and hormone receptor status. We also considered the second column of HR data to determine the accuracy of the data, although no opposite outcomes and few inconsistent outcomes occurred. Notably, significant differences in high-dose tea consumption often appeared in the subgroups of postmenopausal status in the menopause status and ER−/PR− status in the hormone receptor status, and these inconsistencies were also confirmed by the meta-regression analysis. Sensitivity analysis did not find any single study that had a significant impact on the overall results (online supplementary material, Supplemental Fig. 2). Publication bias was detected in some of these outcomes, with an acceptable GRADE quality (Table 3).

Table 3 Ln(HR) and their 95 % CI of breast cancer risks according to the low, moderate and high dose of tea consumption obtained from the subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis of the tea type, menopause status and hormone receptor status

ER, estrogen receptor; PR, progesterone receptor.

* Significant differences.

Existence heterogeneity.

Source of heterogeneity from meta-regression.

§ Publication bias.

In summary, the intake of coffee and tea produced similar results, but the difference was that a low dose of coffee has a role in reducing the incidence of BC but tea does not exert a protective effect until a high dose is consumed, and subgroups of postmenopausal women in the menopause status and ER−/PR− status in the hormone receptor status often revealed a protective effect with significant differences, which were confirmed by the meta-regression analysis (Tables 23). Therefore, we conducted a factor correlation analysis and indeed observed a relationship between the protective efficacy of coffee and tea intake with the menopause status and the status of the hormone receptors ER and PR in BC, particularly ER. No correlation was observed between these factors (Fig. 2). Although the protective effect of coffee was observed after the consumption of a low-dose, decaffeinated coffee is not as effective as regular coffee. Moreover, tea was only effective at high doses, particularly green tea. However, we have not determined the highest recommended daily intake doses of both coffee and tea, and thus we need to continue our research.

Fig. 2 Summary of the results of the correlation analysis of influencing factors and the incidence of breast cancer. *Significant influence. , influence factors; , P values from coffee consumption; , P values from tea consumption

Daily recommended doses of coffee/tea consumption

Low doses of coffee/tea consumption were preset to 0–2 cups/d and high doses of coffee/tea consumption were preset to ≥5 cups/d; however, some of the original studies considered 1–3 cups/d as low-dose consumption and ≥4 cups/d as high-dose consumption. Meanwhile, some studies did not describe the doses, which were only defined as low dose, moderate dose, high dose, etc. Therefore, low-dose coffee consumption included 0–1, 1, 1–2, 2–3, 1+ and 2+ cups/d, high-dose tea consumption included 3+, 4+, 5+ and 3–5 cups/d (Table 4).

Table 4 Relationships between the recommended daily doses of coffee, tea and caffeine consumption with breast cancer risks based on the Ln(HR) and their 95 % CI calculated using a subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis of dose–response relationships and menopause status

* Significant differences.

Existence heterogeneity.

Source of heterogeneity from meta-regression.

§ Publication bias.

When we consider the recommended dose of coffee consumption, significant differences were observed in the subgroup of 2–3 cups/d (−0·034, −0·068 to −0·000), with low heterogeneity (P = 0·448, I 2 = 0·1 %) from the most adjusted effect size data, while the meta-regression analysis revealed a large difference among doses with P < 0·001. These results may support the hypothesis that 2–3 cups/d may be the daily recommended dose of coffee. When we studied high-dose tea consumption, a significant difference was only observed in the group that consumed 5+ cups/d (−0·153, −0·277 to −0·030), with low heterogeneity (P = 0·999, I 2 = 0 %). As a result, the recommended daily dose of tea was more than 5 cups/d.

These results may be due to the much higher caffeine content in coffee than in tea; therefore, we attribute the difference to the caffeine content and conducted another pairwise meta-analysis. The caffeine content was divided into four quartiles (low, moderate, moderate–high and high), and we noticed a significant result for the high caffeine content group (−0·068, −0·128 to 0·009), with some heterogeneity (P = 0·232, I 2 = 30 %), which was also obtained from the most adjusted effect size (Table 4). We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis using effect size data and dichotomous data to obtain the highest recommended caffeine intake. Figure 3a presents the network plot including all direct contrasts among quartiles and the highest quartiles of caffeine content ranked first in two types of original data with significant differences (Fig. 3b).

Fig. 3 Network meta-analysis plots relating to the eligible comparisons of caffeine intake (a) and dose–response effects obtained from the Bayesian network meta-analysis used to determine the recommend dose (b). Comparisons should be read from left to right and were ordered relative to overall prevention potential. The dose in the leftmost position is ranked as recommended from the hazard ratio (HR) and OR data. *Significant difference. , dose–response of caffeine intake; , OR (95 % CI); , HR (95 % CI)

In addition, we compared the relationship between coffee intake, caffeine content and menopausal status. A significant difference was observed in postmenopausal women (Table 4), suggesting that the consumption of a high dose of caffeine may prevent the incidence of BC, particularly in postmenopausal women.

Discussion

The findings of our systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis have revealed the likely benefits of coffee or tea consumption in preventing BC from forty-five studies including 3 323 288 participants(Reference Sánchez-Quesada, Romanos-Nanclares and Navarro19Reference Inoue, Tajima and Mizutani63). First, from the pairwise analysis of the dose-dependent response, the consumption of a low dose of coffee (0–2 cups/d) and high dose of tea (≥5 cups/d) may achieve the goal of preventing the incidence of BC (Tables 23). Additionally, coffee/tea consumption may be more beneficial for postmenopausal patients and preventing the occurrence of ER−/PR− BC, particularly ER− BC, according to the subgroup meta-analysis, meta-analysis and correlation analysis (Tables 23; Fig. 2). Moreover, for low-dose coffee and high-dose tea intake, we determined the recommended daily intake of coffee, tea and caffeine using a pairwise meta-analysis and Bayesian network meta-analysis. We confirmed that the consumption of 2–3 cups of coffee, more than 5 cups tea intake and a high level of caffeine exerts a preventive effect on BC and may be more effective in preventing BC in postmenopausal women (Table 4; Fig. 3).

Our research follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses guideline and the protocol has been registered. Regarding the caffeine content, a total caffeine consumption of ≥414·1 mg or ≥693 mg/d may exert a protective effect on BC. In addition to BC, caffeine may protect against the occurrence and development of many types of malignancy, such as ovarian cancer and skin cancer(Reference Shafiei, Salari-Moghaddam and Milajerdi64Reference Caini, Cattaruzza and Bendinelli65). The results have also been verified in vitro and in vivo (Reference Bułdak, Hejmo and Osowski66Reference Kolberg, Pedersen and Mitake67). As an antioxidant, a high concentration of caffeine might induce the formation of oxygen-centred radical, resulting in a decrease in reactive oxygen species (ROS) production and protection from cell damage, DNA mutation and inflammation, which are the causes of tumourigenesis. Additionally, caffeine not only affects immune cells, such as T and B lymphocytes, NK cells and macrophages, but also affects cytokines, such as TNF-α and IL-2, which have a variety of functions, to improve immunity in the body(Reference Cui, Wang and Pan68). Moreover, caffeine may represent a therapeutic agent for BC by activating apoptosis-inducing mechanisms(Reference Shashni, Sharma and Singh69). Therefore, the intake of decaffeinated coffee is not as effective as total coffee consumption, and similar results have been reported in published studies(Reference Micek, Godos and Lafranconi70Reference Kennedy, Roderick and Buchanan71).

The effect of caffeine intake on postmenopausal women was more effective in our study, probably because of the positive association of coffee and caffeine intake with sex hormone binding to globulin in postmenopausal women, suggesting another potential mechanism by which coffee may reduce the levels of circulating oestrogens and subsequently the risk of malignancies. This mechanism may explain why coffee consumption may reduce the incidence of ER− BC(Reference Kotsopoulos, Eliassen and Missmer72). Numerous studies have discussed the adverse cardiovascular reactions associated with caffeine consumption; however, moderate caffeine intake is not associated with increased risks of total CVD, arrhythmia, heart failure and blood pressure changes;(Reference Turnbull, Rodricks and Mariano73Reference Grant, Magruder and Friedman74) the evidence described above confirms that caffeine intake is safe. According to our research, the consumption of coffee and tea, particularly a low dose of coffee (2–3 cups/d) and high dose of tea (≥5 cups/d), exerted effects on preventing BC. According to the baseline meta-analysis, caffeine intake may reverse the cancer risk associated with obesity, smoking and alcohol intake(Reference Picon-Ruiz, Morata-Tarifa and Valle-Goffin75Reference Shield, Soerjomataram and Rehm77); and also tea consumption seems more beneficial than harmful(Reference Shirai, Kuriki and Otsuka78), this discovery is very new and must be confirmed in other studies.

Our network meta-analysis has some limitations. First, heterogeneity often occurs in dichotomous data for OR, and the results of HR data and OR data are likely to be inconsistent, probably because the dichotomous data have not been adjusted. Meanwhile, the heterogeneity in HR data was much lower (Tables 2 and 3) and the heterogeneity of the original data analysis was substantial at baseline (Table 1); therefore, we used the most adjusted HR data to determine the accuracy of the data in subsequent analyses (Table 4). Second, the GRADE score for the outcome is not high, likely because all the publications we included are not randomised controlled trials and because dietary factors are unable to be randomised; publication bias also occasionally appeared in the tea group, due to the difficulty in publishing negative results. Third, the quality and the preparation of coffee were difficult to standardise, such as filtered or unfiltered, coffee bean roasting level and species of coffee beans; additionally, numerous types of tea were consumed, such as green tea (non-fermented), black tea (fermented) and oolong tea (semifermented), and thus the quality of tea was also difficult to standardise.

Compared with the previously published meta-analysis, our study includes the largest sample size. Our study is the first to determine the recommended daily intake of coffee and tea, which have value in guiding epidemiology and clinical practice. However, as mentioned above, the differences between different types of coffee and tea are substantial, and few studies mention the concentration of each cup of coffee or tea, and how many ml is consumed per cup. In the future, we hope to regulate the daily intake of caffeine and anticipate high-quality, preferably prospective studies, as well as ethnic and regional subgroup meta-analyses.

In conclusion, our systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis provide compelling evidence for the association between coffee/tea consumption and a decreased risk of BC, especially postmenopausal women, and particularly ER− BC. The recommended daily dose for preventing BC is 2–3 cups of coffee/d and more than 5 cups of tea/d, which are also safe doses. Future studies are expected to regulate the caffeine dosage in coffee and tea to determine the recommended daily caffeine dosage.

Acknowledgements

Acknowledgements: None. Financial support: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. Conflict of interest: There are no conflicts of interest. Authorship: S.W, X.L., Y.S.Z. and M.Y.L. designed the research; S.W., X.L., X.C.Q. and J.P.X. conducted the research; S.W., Y.Y., M.Y.L., Y.Z. and Y.Z. analysed the data; S.W., Y.S.Z. and Q.Z. wrote the paper; Q.C.Z. had primary responsibility for final content. All authors are involved in writing the article. Ethics of human subject participation: Not applicable.

Supplementary material

For supplementary material accompanying this paper visit https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980021000720

References

Siegel, RL, Miller, KD & Jemal, A (2019) Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin 69, 734.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bray, F, Ferlay, J, Soerjomataram, I et al. (2018) Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 68, 394424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tallet, A, Racadot, S, Boher, JM et al. (2020) The actual benefit of intraoperative radiation therapy using 50 kV x-rays in early breast cancer: a retrospective study of 676 patients. Breast J 26, 21452150.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dando, I, Pozza, ED, Ambrosini, G et al. (2019) Oncometabolites in cancer aggressiveness and tumour repopulation. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc 94, 15301546.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Puig, I, Tenbaum, SP, Chicote, I et al. (2018) TET2 controls chemoresistant slow-cycling cancer cell survival and tumor recurrence. J Clin Invest 128, 38873905.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Creed, JH, Smith-Warner, SA, Gerke, TA et al. (2020) A prospective study of coffee and tea consumption and the risk of glioma in the UK Biobank. Eur J Cancer 129, 123131.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jarosz, M & Rychlik, E (2019) Coffee and alcohol consumption and trends in colorectal cancer morbidity in Poland. Ann Oncol 30, Suppl. 4, iv53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poorolajal, J, Moradi, L, Mohammadi, Y et al. (2020) Risk factors for stomach cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Epidemiol Health 42, e2020004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tenbaum, SP, Ordóñez-Morán, P, Puig, I et al. (2012) β-catenin confers resistance to PI3K and AKT inhibitors and subverts FOXO3a to promote metastasis in colon cancer. Nat Med 18, 892901.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, Y, Zhao, Y, Chong, F et al. (2020) A dose-response meta-analysis of green tea consumption and breast cancer risk. Int J Food Sci Nutr 20, 112.Google Scholar
Lafranconi, A, Micek, A, De Paoli, P et al. (2018) Coffee intake decreases risk of postmenopausal breast cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis on prospective cohort studies. Nutrients 10, 112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yaghjyan, L, Colditz, G, Rosner, B et al. (2019) Adolescent caffeine consumption and mammographic breast density in premenopausal women. Eur J Nutr 59, 16331639.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hutton, B, Salanti, G, Caldwell, DM et al. (2015) The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations. Ann Intern Med 162, 777784.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
ROSPERO (2009) Centre for reviews and dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care (Internet). New York, England: University of York.Google Scholar
Wells, GA, Shea, B, O’Connell, D et al. (2019) The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses – 2008. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp (accessed January 2019).Google Scholar
Guyatt, GH, Oxman, AD, Vist, GE et al. (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336, 924.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yang, C, Gong, G, Jin, E et al. (2019) Topical application of honey in the management of chemo/radiotherapy-induced oral mucositis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Int J Nurs Stud 89, 8087.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feng, F, Jiang, Q, Jia, H et al. (2018) Which is the best combination of TACE and Sorafenib for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma treatment? A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Pharmacol Res 135, 89101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sánchez-Quesada, C, Romanos-Nanclares, A, Navarro, AM et al. (2020) Coffee consumption and breast cancer risk in the SUN project. Eur J Nutr 59, 34613471.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, PMY, Chan, WC, Kwok, CC et al. (2019) Associations between coffee products and breast cancer risk: a case-control study in Hong Kong Chinese women. Sci Rep 9, 12684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ong, JS, Law, MH, An, J et al. (2019) Association between coffee consumption and overall risk of being diagnosed with or dying from cancer among >300 000 UK Biobank participants in a large-scale Mendelian randomization study. Int J Epidemiol 48, 14471456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Björner, S, Rosendahl, AH, Tryggvadottir, H et al. (2018) Coffee is associated with lower breast tumor insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 levels in normal-weight patients and improved prognosis following tamoxifen or radiotherapy treatment. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) 9, 306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yaghjyan, L, Rich, S, Mao, L et al. (2018) Interactions of coffee consumption and postmenopausal hormone use in relation to breast cancer risk in UK Biobank. Cancer Causes Control 29, 519525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gapstur, SM, Anderson, RL, Campbell, PT et al. (2017) Associations of coffee drinking and cancer mortality in the cancer prevention study-II. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 26, 14771486.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kotemori, A, Ishihara, J, Zha, L et al. (2018) Dietary acrylamide intake and risk of breast cancer: the Japan Public Health Center-based Prospective Study. Cancer Sci 109, 843853.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trieu, PDY, Mello-Thoms, C, Peat, JK et al. (2017) Inconsistencies of breast cancer risk factors between the northern and southern regions of Vietnam. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 18, 27472754.Google ScholarPubMed
Li, M, Tse, LA, Chan, WC et al. (2016) Evaluation of breast cancer risk associated with tea consumption by menopausal and estrogen receptor status among Chinese women in Hong Kong. Cancer Epidemiol 40, 7378.Google ScholarPubMed
Lukic, M, Licaj, I, Lund, E et al. (2016) Coffee consumption and the risk of cancer in the Norwegian Women and Cancer (NOWAC) Study. Eur J Epidemiol 31, c905c916.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhoo-Pathy, N, Peeters, PH, Uiterwaal, CS et al. (2015) Coffee and tea consumption and risk of pre- and postmenopausal breast cancer in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort study. Breast Cancer Res 17, 15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, HR, Bergkvist, L & Wolk, A (2015) An estrogen-associated dietary pattern and breast cancer risk in the Swedish Mammography Cohort. Int J Cancer 137, 21492154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hashibe, M, Galeone, C, Buys, SS et al. (2015) Coffee, tea, caffeine intake, and the risk of cancer in the PLCO cohort. Br J Cancer 113, 809816.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oh, JK, Sandin, S, Ström, P et al. (2015) Prospective study of breast cancer in relation to coffee, tea and caffeine in Sweden. Int J Cancer 137, 1979–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sisti, JS, Hankinson, SE, Caporaso, NE et al. (2015) Caffeine, coffee, and tea intake and urinary estrogens and estrogen metabolites in premenopausal women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 24, 11741183.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iwasaki, M, Mizusawa, J, Kasuga, Y et al. (2014) Green tea consumption and breast cancer risk in Japanese women: a case-control study. Nutr Cancer 66, 5767.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lehrer, S, Green, S & Rosenzweig, KE (2013) Coffee consumption associated with increased mortality of women with breast cancer. J Caffeine Res 3, 3840.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lowcock, EC, Cotterchio, M, Anderson, LN et al. (2013) High coffee intake, but not caffeine, is associated with reduced estrogen receptor negative and postmenopausal breast cancer risk with no effect modification by CYP1A2 genotype. Nutr Cancer 65, 398409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mizoo, T, Taira, N, Nishiyama, K et al. (2013) Effects of lifestyle and single nucleotide polymorphisms on breast cancer risk: a case-control study in Japanese women. BMC Cancer 13, 565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simonsson, M, Söderlind, V, Henningson, M et al. (2013) Coffee prevents early events in tamoxifen-treated breast cancer patients and modulates hormone receptor status. Cancer Causes Control 24, 929940.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wang, L, Liao, WC, Tsai, CJ et al. (2013) The effects of perceived stress and life style leading to breast cancer. Women Health 53, 2040.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gierach, GL, Freedman, ND, Andaya, A et al. (2012) Coffee intake and breast cancer risk in the NIH-AARP diet and health study cohort. Int J Cancer 131, 452460.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, HR, Bergkvist, L & Wolk, A (2012) Coffee and black tea consumption and breast cancer mortality in a cohort of Swedish women. Br J Cancer 107, 874878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fagherazzi, G, Touillaud, MS, Boutron-Ruault, MC et al. (2011) No association between coffee, tea or caffeine consumption and breast cancer risk in a prospective cohort study. Public Health Nutr 14, 13151320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Li, J, Seibold, P, Chang-Claude, J et al. (2011) Coffee consumption modifies risk of estrogen-receptor negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 13, R49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bhoo Pathy, N, Peeters, P, van Gils, C et al. (2010) Coffee and tea intake and risk of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 121, 461467.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boggs, DA, Palmer, JR, Stampfer, MJ et al. (2010) Tea and coffee intake in relation to risk of breast cancer in the Black Women’s Health Study. Cancer Causes Control 21, 19411948.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dai, Q, Shu, XO, Li, H et al. (2010) Is green tea drinking associated with a later onset of breast cancer? Ann Epidemiol 20, 7481.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nilsson, LM, Johansson, I, Lenner, P et al. (2010) Consumption of filtered and boiled coffee and the risk of incident cancer: a prospective cohort study. Cancer Causes Control 21, 15331544.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bissonauth, V, Shatenstein, B, Fafard, E et al. (2009) Risk of breast cancer among French-Canadian women, noncarriers of more frequent BRCA1/2 mutations and consumption of total energy, coffee, and alcohol. Breast J 15, Suppl. 1, S63S71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larsson, SC, Bergkvist, L & Wolk, A (2009) Coffee and black tea consumption and risk of breast cancer by estrogen and progesterone receptor status in a Swedish cohort. Cancer Causes Control 20, 20392044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shrubsole, MJ, Lu, W, Chen, Z et al. (2009) Drinking green tea modestly reduces breast cancer risk. J Nutr 139, 310316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilson, KM, Mucci, LA, Cho, E et al. (2009) Dietary acrylamide intake and risk of premenopausal breast cancer. Am J Epidemiol 169, 954961.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ganmaa, D, Willett, WC, Li, TY et al. (2008) Coffee, tea, caffeine and risk of breast cancer: a 22-year follow-up. Int J Cancer 122, 20712076.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inoue, M, Robien, K, Wang, R et al. (2008) Green tea intake, MTHFR/TYMS genotype and breast cancer risk: the Singapore Chinese Health Study. Carcinogenesis 29, 19671972.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ishitani, K, Lin, J, Manson, JE et al. (2008) Caffeine consumption and the risk of breast cancer in a large prospective cohort of women. Arch Intern Med 168, 20222031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotsopoulos, J, Ghadirian, P, El-Sohemy, A et al. (2007) The CYP1A2 genotype modifies the association between coffee consumption and breast cancer risk among BRCA1 mutation carriers. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 16, 912916.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baker, JA, Beehler, GP, Sawant, AC et al. (2006) Consumption of coffee, but not black tea, is associated with decreased risk of premenopausal breast cancer. J Nutr 136, 166171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gronwald, J, Byrski, T, Huzarski, T et al. (2006) Influence of selected lifestyle factors on breast and ovarian cancer risk in BRCA1 mutation carriers from Poland. Breast Cancer Res Treat 95, 105109.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hirvonen, T, Mennen, LI, de Bree, A et al. (2006) Consumption of antioxidant-rich beverages and risk for breast cancer in French women. Ann Epidemiol 16, 503508.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nkondjock, A, Ghadirian, P, Kotsopoulos, J et al. (2006) Coffee consumption and breast cancer risk among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers. Int J Cancer 118, 103107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suzuki, Y, Tsubono, Y, Nakaya, N et al. (2004) Green tea and the risk of breast cancer: pooled analysis of two prospective studies in Japan. Br J Cancer 90, 13611363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wu, AH, Yu, MC, Tseng, CC et al. (2003) Green tea and risk of breast cancer in Asian Americans. Int J Cancer 106, 574579.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Michels, KB, Holmberg, L, Bergkvist, L et al. (2002) Coffee, tea, and caffeine consumption and breast cancer incidence in a cohort of Swedish women. Ann Epidemiol 12, 2126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inoue, M, Tajima, K, Mizutani, M et al. (2001) Regular consumption of green tea and the risk of breast cancer recurrence: follow-up study from the Hospital-based Epidemiologic Research Program at Aichi Cancer Center (HERPACC), Japan. Cancer Lett 167, 175182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shafiei, F, Salari-Moghaddam, A, Milajerdi, A et al. (2019) Coffee and caffeine intake and risk of ovarian cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Gynecol Cancer 29, 579584.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caini, S, Cattaruzza, MS, Bendinelli, B et al. (2017) Coffee, tea and caffeine intake and the risk of non-melanoma skin cancer: a review of the literature and meta-analysis. Eur J Nutr 56, 112.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bułdak, RJ, Hejmo, T, Osowski, M et al. (2018) The impact of coffee and its selected bioactive compounds on the development and progression of colorectal cancer in vivo and in vitro . Molecules 23, 3309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kolberg, M, Pedersen, S, Mitake, M et al. (2016) Coffee inhibits nuclear factor-kappa B in prostate cancer cells and xenografts. J Nutr Biochem 27, 153163.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cui, WQ, Wang, ST, Pan, D et al. (2020) Caffeine and its main targets of colorectal cancer. World J Gastrointest Oncol 12, 149172.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shashni, B, Sharma, K, Singh, R et al. (2013) Coffee component hydroxyl hydroquinone (HHQ) as a putative ligand for PPAR gamma and implications in breast cancer. BMC Genomics 14, Suppl. 5, S6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Micek, A, Godos, J, Lafranconi, A et al. (2018) Caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee consumption and melanoma risk: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Int J Food Sci Nutr 69, 417426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, OJ, Roderick, P, Buchanan, R et al. (2017) Coffee, including caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee, and the risk of hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. BMJ Open 7, e013739.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kotsopoulos, J, Eliassen, AH, Missmer, SA et al. (2009) Relationship between caffeine intake and plasma sex hormone concentrations in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Cancer 115, 27652774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turnbull, D, Rodricks, JV, Mariano, GF et al. (2017) Caffeine and cardiovascular health. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 89, 165185.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grant, SS, Magruder, KP & Friedman, BH (2018) Controlling for caffeine in cardiovascular research: a critical review. Int J Psychophysiol 133, 193201.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Picon-Ruiz, M, Morata-Tarifa, C, Valle-Goffin, JJ et al. (2017) Obesity and adverse breast cancer risk and outcome: mechanistic insights and strategies for intervention. CA Cancer J Clin 67, 378397.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, ME, Schoemaker, MJ, Wright, LB et al. (2017) Smoking and risk of breast cancer in the generations study cohort. Breast Cancer Res 19, 118.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shield, KD, Soerjomataram, I & Rehm, J (2016) Alcohol use and breast cancer: a critical review. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 40, 11661181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shirai, Y, Kuriki, K, Otsuka, R et al. (2019) Green tea and coffee intake and risk of cognitive decline in older adults: the National Institute for Longevity Sciences, Longitudinal Study of Aging. Public Health Nutr 23, 19.Google ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Fig. 1 Procedure used to select studies examining coffee and tea consumption and the breast cancer risk

Figure 1

Table 1 Summary of the baseline main characteristics of coffee and tea consumption and the breast cancer risk

Figure 2

Table 2 Ln(HR) and their 95 % CI of breast cancer risks according to low, moderate and high coffee consumption obtained from the subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis of the coffee type, menopause status, hormone receptor status and BMI

Figure 3

Table 3 Ln(HR) and their 95 % CI of breast cancer risks according to the low, moderate and high dose of tea consumption obtained from the subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis of the tea type, menopause status and hormone receptor status

Figure 4

Fig. 2 Summary of the results of the correlation analysis of influencing factors and the incidence of breast cancer. *Significant influence. , influence factors; , P values from coffee consumption; , P values from tea consumption

Figure 5

Table 4 Relationships between the recommended daily doses of coffee, tea and caffeine consumption with breast cancer risks based on the Ln(HR) and their 95 % CI calculated using a subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis of dose–response relationships and menopause status

Figure 6

Fig. 3 Network meta-analysis plots relating to the eligible comparisons of caffeine intake (a) and dose–response effects obtained from the Bayesian network meta-analysis used to determine the recommend dose (b). Comparisons should be read from left to right and were ordered relative to overall prevention potential. The dose in the leftmost position is ranked as recommended from the hazard ratio (HR) and OR data. *Significant difference. , dose–response of caffeine intake; , OR (95 % CI); , HR (95 % CI)

Supplementary material: File

Wang et al. supplementary material

Wang et al. supplementary material

Download Wang et al. supplementary material(File)
File 2.6 MB