2012
DOI: 10.1001/archdermatol.2012.1374
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Smoking and the Risk of Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

6
49
1
3

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 99 publications
(59 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
(92 reference statements)
6
49
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Apart from skin cancer Zelefsky et al could not find any excessive risk of SC [21]. In contrast, no such increase was detectable in the RT after RPE group from our analysis indicating that the small increase in non-melanoma skin cancer in RT only patients may be attributed to other factors than the use of RT [39]. …”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 57%
“…Apart from skin cancer Zelefsky et al could not find any excessive risk of SC [21]. In contrast, no such increase was detectable in the RT after RPE group from our analysis indicating that the small increase in non-melanoma skin cancer in RT only patients may be attributed to other factors than the use of RT [39]. …”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 57%
“…In a well-designed cohort study in Australia the risk of BCC was reduced in current-versus-never smokers (RR 0.69; 95% CI 0.45–1.05) [28]. These results were consistent with the results of a meta-analysis that for BCC estimated a summary odds ratio (OR) of 0.95 (95% CI 0.82–1.09) in smokers compared with nonsmokers across 17 studies [29]. …”
Section: Individual Lifestyle Risk Factorssupporting
confidence: 69%
“…In the same meta-analysis by Leonardi-Bee, smoking was significantly associated with SCC risk although only 7 studies contributed data (summary OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.15–2.01) [29]. However, in a cohort study of smoking in relation to SCC risk carried out in Australia that was specifically designed to study skin cancer and thus had excellently characterized sun exposure and skin type data, the comparison of current smokers with never smokers yielded a relative risk that was weak and not statistically significant (RR 1.12; 95% CI 0.82–1.50); further, there was no evidence of a dose-response relationship [30].…”
Section: Individual Lifestyle Risk Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…False positive results also are possible due to multiple comparisons, and chance could explain some borderline associations. Finally, we lacked information on smoking history, which is related to SCC (51). and our UVR exposure metric was limited because it reflected residence at the time of transplant, rather than during childhood (52), and we lacked information on sun sensitivity factors (e.g., Fitzpatrick skin type), time spent outdoors, or sun shielding behaviors, though UVR is unlikely to confound non-cutaneous cancer risk estimates.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%