BACKGROUND: Alcohol consumption has been associated with increased risks of certain site-specific cancers and decreased risks of some other cancers. There is, however, little reliable evidence as to whether the alcohol-associated risks for specific cancers are modified by smoking, body mass index (BMI) and menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) use.
METHODS: In the prospective UK Million Women Study, 1,233,177 postmenopausal women without prior cancer, mean age 56 (SD 5) years, reported their alcohol consumption in median year 1998 (IQR 1998-1999), and were followed by record-linkage for incident cancer. 438,056 women who drank no alcohol or < 1 drink/week were excluded. Cox regression yielded adjusted relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for 21 cancers by alcohol amount; statistical significance of interactions with smoking, BMI and MHT use was assessed after allowing for multiple testing.
RESULTS: In 795,121 participants, mean consumption was 6.7 (SD 6.4) alcoholic drinks/week. During 17 (SD 5) years of follow-up, 140,203 incident cancers were recorded. There was strong evidence for a substantial association between alcohol intake and risk of upper aero-digestive cancers (oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma, oral cavity, pharynx and larynx; RR per 1 drink/day = 1.38 [95% CI 1.31-1.46]). There was also strong evidence for more moderate positive associations with breast, colorectal and pancreatic cancer (RRs per 1 drink/day = 1.12 [1.10-1.14], 1.10 [1.07-1.13], 1.08 [1.02-1.13] respectively), and moderate negative associations with thyroid cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, renal cell carcinoma and multiple myeloma (RRs per 1 drink/day = 0.79 [0.70-0.89], 0.91 [0.86-0.95], 0.88 [0.83-0.94], 0.90 [0.84-0.97] respectively). Significant interactions between alcohol and smoking were seen for upper aero-digestive cancers (RRs per 1 drink/day = 1.66 [1.54-1.79], 1.23 [1.11-1.36], 1.12 [1.01-1.25] in current, past, and never smokers respectively). BMI and MHT did not significantly modify any alcohol-associated risks.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide robust evidence that greater alcohol intake, even within relatively moderate ranges, increases the risk of cancers of the aerodigestive tract, breast, colorectal and pancreatic cancer, and probably decreases the risk of thyroid cancer, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, renal cell carcinoma and multiple myeloma. Associations of alcohol intake with cancer risk were not modified by MHT use, adiposity or smoking, except in the case of upper aero-digestive cancers, where the alcohol-associated risk was largely confined to smokers.
BACKGROUND: Headache is one of the most common neurological symptoms. Many previous studies have indicated a relationship between primary headaches and alcohol. Drinking has been associated with increased risk of tension-type headache (TTH) and migraine. However, recently published studies have not confirmed this relationship. The existing literature is inconclusive; however, migraine patients avoid alcohol. Therefore, the primary objective was to provide a reliable assessment of alcohol intake in people with primary headaches; the secondary objective was to identify any potential relationship between alcohol consumption and headache risk.
METHODS: This study was based on PubMed, Embase and Web of Science database searches performed on 11 July 2023. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023412926). Risk of bias for the included studies was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal tools. Meta-analyses were performed using Statistica software. The Risk Ratio (RR) was adopted as the measure of the final effect. Analyses were based on a dichotomous division of the respondents into "non-drinkers" and "drinkers" for headache patients and matched non-headache groups.
RESULTS: From a total of 1892 articles, 22 were included in the meta-analysis. The majority demonstrated a moderate or high risk of bias. The first part of the meta-analysis was performed on data obtained from 19 migraine studies with 126 173 participants. The risk of migraine in alcohol drinkers is approximately 1.5 times lower than in the group of non-drinkers (RR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.57-0.89). The second part involved 9 TTH studies with 28 715 participants. No relationship was found between TTH diagnosis and alcohol consumption (RR = 1.09; 95% CI: 0.93-1.27). Two of the included cluster-headache articles had inconclusive results.
CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol consumption and migraine are inversely correlated. The exact mechanism behind this observation may indicate that migraine leads to alcohol-avoidance, rather than alcohol having any protective role against migraine. There was no relationship between TTH and drinking. However, further studies related to primary headaches and alcohol consumption with low risk of bias are required. Additionally, patients and physicians should consider the latest medical data, in order to avoid the myths about alcohol consumption and primary headaches.
OBJECTIVE: To estimate the effects of providing access to an alcohol intervention based on a smartphone.
DESIGN: Randomised controlled trial..
SETTING: Four higher education institutions in Switzerland.
PARTICIPANTS: 1770 students (>/=18 years) who screened positive for unhealthy alcohol use (ie, a score on the alcohol use disorders identification test-consumption (AUDIT-C) of >/=4 for men and >/=3 for women) were randomly assigned by 1:1 allocation ratio in blocks of 10.
INTERVENTION: Providing access to a brief, smartphone based alcohol intervention.
OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome studied was number of standard drinks per week at six months and the secondary outcome was number of heavy drinking days (past 30 days). Additional outcomes were maximum number of drinks consumed on one occasion, alcohol related consequences, and academic performance. Follow-up assessments occurred at months three, six, and 12. Data were analysed by intention to treat and by using generalised linear mixed models with random intercepts for the recruitment site and participants nested within the recruitment site, and with intervention (v control), time (three months v six months; 12 months v six months), and baseline outcome values as fixed effects.
RESULTS: Between 26 April 26 2021 and 30 May 2022, 1770 participants (intervention group (n=884); control group (n=886)) were included. Mean age was 22.4 years (standard deviation 3.07); 958 (54.1%) were women; and 1169 (66.0%) were undergraduate students, 533 (30.1%) were studying for a master's degree, 43 (2.4%) were studying for a doctorate, and 25 (1.4%) were students of other higher education programme. The baseline mean number of standard drinks per week was 8.59 (standard deviation 8.18); the baseline number of heavy drinking days was 3.53 (4.02). Of 1770 participants, follow-up rates were 1706 (96.4%) at three months, 1697 (95.9%) at six months, and 1660 (93.8%) at 12 months. Of 884 students randomly assigned to the intervention group, 738 (83.5%) downloaded the smartphone application. The intervention had a significant overall effect on the number of standard drinks per week (incidence rate ratio 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.85 to 0.96)), heavy drinking days (0.89 (0.83 to 0.96)), and the maximum number of drinks consumed on one occasion (0.96 (0.93 to 1.00), P=0.029), indicating significantly lower drinking outcomes in the intervention group than in the control group during the follow-up period. The intervention did not affect alcohol related consequences or academic performance.
CONCLUSIONS: Providing access to the smartphone application throughout the 12 month follow-up was effective at limiting the average drinking volume of university students who had self-reported unhealthy alcohol use at baseline.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 10007691.