Filippini Tommaso, Malavolti Marcella, Borrelli Francesca, Izzo Angelo A, Fairweather-Tait Susan J, Horneber Markus, Vinceti Marco
University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Research Center in Environmental, Nutritional and Genetic Epidemiology (CREAGEN), Department of Biomedical, Metabolic and Neural Sciences, Via Campi 287, Modena, Italy, 41125.
University of Naples 'Federico II', Department of Pharmacy, School of Medicine and Surgery, Via D Montesano 49, Naples, Italy, 80131.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Mar 2;3(3):CD005004. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005004.pub3.
This review is an update of a previously published review in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2009, Issue 3).Tea is one of the most commonly consumed beverages worldwide. Teas from the plant Camellia sinensis can be grouped into green, black and oolong tea, and drinking habits vary cross-culturally. C sinensis contains polyphenols, one subgroup being catechins. Catechins are powerful antioxidants, and laboratory studies have suggested that these compounds may inhibit cancer cell proliferation. Some experimental and nonexperimental epidemiological studies have suggested that green tea may have cancer-preventative effects.
To assess possible associations between green tea consumption and the risk of cancer incidence and mortality as primary outcomes, and safety data and quality of life as secondary outcomes.
We searched eligible studies up to January 2019 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of previous reviews and included studies.
We included all epidemiological studies, experimental (i.e. randomised controlled trials (RCTs)) and nonexperimental (non-randomised studies, i.e. observational studies with both cohort and case-control design) that investigated the association of green tea consumption with cancer risk or quality of life, or both.
Two or more review authors independently applied the study criteria, extracted data and assessed methodological quality of studies. We summarised the results according to diagnosis of cancer type.
In this review update, we included in total 142 completed studies (11 experimental and 131 nonexperimental) and two ongoing studies. This is an additional 10 experimental and 85 nonexperimental studies from those included in the previous version of the review. Eleven experimental studies allocated a total of 1795 participants to either green tea extract or placebo, all demonstrating an overall high methodological quality based on 'Risk of bias' assessment. For incident prostate cancer, the summary risk ratio (RR) in the green tea-supplemented participants was 0.50 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.18 to 1.36), based on three studies and involving 201 participants (low-certainty evidence). The summary RR for gynaecological cancer was 1.50 (95% CI 0.41 to 5.48; 2 studies, 1157 participants; low-certainty evidence). No evidence of effect of non-melanoma skin cancer emerged (summary RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 15.92; 1 study, 1075 participants; low-certainty evidence). In addition, adverse effects of green tea extract intake were reported, including gastrointestinal disorders, elevation of liver enzymes, and, more rarely, insomnia, raised blood pressure and skin/subcutaneous reactions. Consumption of green tea extracts induced a slight improvement in quality of life, compared with placebo, based on three experimental studies. In nonexperimental studies, we included over 1,100,000 participants from 46 cohort studies and 85 case-control studies, which were on average of intermediate to high methodological quality based on Newcastle-Ottawa Scale 'Risk of bias' assessment. When comparing the highest intake of green tea with the lowest, we found a lower overall cancer incidence (summary RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.07), based on three studies, involving 52,479 participants (low-certainty evidence). Conversely, we found no association between green tea consumption and cancer-related mortality (summary RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.07), based on eight studies and 504,366 participants (low-certainty evidence). For most of the site-specific cancers we observed a decreased RR in the highest category of green tea consumption compared with the lowest one. After stratifying the analysis according to study design, we found strongly conflicting results for some cancer sites: oesophageal, prostate and urinary tract cancer, and leukaemia showed an increased RR in cohort studies and a decreased RR or no difference in case-control studies.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings from experimental and nonexperimental epidemiological studies yielded inconsistent results, thus providing limited evidence for the beneficial effect of green tea consumption on the overall risk of cancer or on specific cancer sites. Some evidence of a beneficial effect of green tea at some cancer sites emerged from the RCTs and from case-control studies, but their methodological limitations, such as the low number and size of the studies, and the inconsistencies with the results of cohort studies, limit the interpretability of the RR estimates. The studies also indicated the occurrence of several side effects associated with high intakes of green tea. In addition, the majority of included studies were carried out in Asian populations characterised by a high intake of green tea, thus limiting the generalisability of the findings to other populations. Well conducted and adequately powered RCTs would be needed to draw conclusions on the possible beneficial effects of green tea consumption on cancer risk.
本综述是对先前发表在《Cochrane系统评价数据库》(2009年第3期)中的综述的更新。茶是全球消费最普遍的饮品之一。茶树(Camellia sinensis)制成的茶可分为绿茶、红茶和乌龙茶,不同文化背景下的饮茶习惯各不相同。茶树含有多酚类物质,其中一个亚类是儿茶素。儿茶素是强大的抗氧化剂,实验室研究表明这些化合物可能抑制癌细胞增殖。一些实验性和非实验性流行病学研究表明绿茶可能具有防癌作用。
评估饮用绿茶与癌症发病率和死亡率风险之间的可能关联作为主要结局,以及安全性数据和生活质量作为次要结局。
我们检索了截至2019年1月CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、ClinicalTrials.gov中的符合条件的研究,以及先前综述和纳入研究的参考文献列表。
我们纳入了所有调查饮用绿茶与癌症风险或生活质量或两者之间关联的流行病学研究,包括实验性(即随机对照试验(RCT))和非实验性(非随机研究,即队列研究和病例对照设计的观察性研究)。
两名或更多综述作者独立应用研究标准,提取数据并评估研究的方法学质量。我们根据癌症类型的诊断总结结果。
在本次综述更新中,我们总共纳入了142项完成的研究(11项实验性研究和131项非实验性研究)以及两项正在进行的研究。这比综述先前版本纳入的研究增加了10项实验性研究和85项非实验性研究。11项实验性研究共将1795名参与者分配至绿茶提取物组或安慰剂组,基于“偏倚风险”评估,所有研究总体方法学质量较高。对于前列腺癌发病,基于三项研究且涉及201名参与者,补充绿茶的参与者的汇总风险比(RR)为0.50(95%置信区间(CI)0.18至1.36)(低确定性证据)。妇科癌症的汇总RR为1.50(95%CI 0.41至5.48;2项研究,1157名参与者;低确定性证据)。未发现非黑色素瘤皮肤癌有影响证据(汇总RR 1.00,95%CI 0.06至15.92;1项研究;1075名参与者;低确定性证据)。此外,报告了摄入绿茶提取物的不良反应,包括胃肠道紊乱、肝酶升高,以及较少见的失眠、血压升高和皮肤/皮下反应。基于三项实验性研究,与安慰剂相比,摄入绿茶提取物使生活质量略有改善。在非实验性研究中,我们纳入了来自46项队列研究和85项病例对照研究的超过110万名参与者,基于纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表“偏倚风险”评估,这些研究平均方法学质量为中到高。将绿茶最高摄入量与最低摄入量进行比较时,基于三项研究且涉及52479名参与者,我们发现总体癌症发病率较低(汇总RR 0.83,95%CI 0.65至1.07)(低确定性证据)。相反,基于八项研究和504366名参与者,我们发现饮用绿茶与癌症相关死亡率之间无关联(汇总RR 0.99,95%CI 0.91至1.07)(低确定性证据)。对于大多数特定部位癌症,我们观察到与最低绿茶摄入量类别相比,最高绿茶摄入量类别中的RR降低。根据研究设计进行分层分析后,我们发现某些癌症部位的结果存在强烈冲突:食管癌、前列腺癌和泌尿系统癌症以及白血病在队列研究中RR升高,而在病例对照研究中RR降低或无差异。
总体而言,实验性和非实验性流行病学研究结果不一致,因此为饮用绿茶对总体癌症风险或特定癌症部位的有益作用提供的证据有限。RCT和病例对照研究中出现了一些绿茶对某些癌症部位有益作用的证据,但它们的方法学局限性,如研究数量少、规模小以及与队列研究结果不一致,限制了RR估计值的可解释性。研究还表明高剂量饮用绿茶会出现多种副作用。此外,纳入的大多数研究是在绿茶摄入量高的亚洲人群中进行的,因此限制了研究结果对其他人群的普遍性。需要进行设计良好且样本量充足的RCT,以得出饮用绿茶对癌症风险可能有益作用的结论。