Coffee consumption and risk of renal cell carcinoma
- 278 Downloads
Studies have suggested an inverse association between coffee consumption and risk of renal cell carcinoma (RCC); however, data regarding decaffeinated coffee are limited.
We conducted a case–control study of 669 incident RCC cases and 1,001 frequency-matched controls. Participants completed identical risk factor questionnaires that solicited information about usual coffee consumption habits. The study participants were categorized as non-coffee, caffeinated coffee, decaffeinated coffee, or both caffeinated and decaffeinated coffee drinkers. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using logistic regression, adjusting for multiple risk factors for RCC.
Compared with no coffee consumption, we found an inverse association between caffeinated coffee consumption and RCC risk (OR 0.74; 95% CI 0.57–0.99), whereas we observed a trend toward increased risk of RCC for consumption of decaffeinated coffee (OR 1.47; 95% CI 0.98–2.19). Decaffeinated coffee consumption was associated also with increased risk of the clear cell RCC (ccRCC) subtype, particularly the aggressive form of ccRCC (OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.01–3.22).
Consumption of caffeinated coffee is associated with reduced risk of RCC, while decaffeinated coffee consumption is associated with an increase in risk of aggressive ccRCC. Further inquiry is warranted in large prospective studies and should include assessment of dose–response associations.
KeywordsCoffee Decaffeinated coffee Kidney cancer Renal cell carcinoma RCC Clear cell renal cell carcinoma
Body mass index
Clear cell renal cell carcinoma
Renal cell carcinoma
Stage, size, grade, and necrosis
We are indebted to the participants of the Mayo Clinic Kidney Cancer Registry, participants of Mayo Clinic Biobank, and the participants from the Department of Family and Community Medicine at Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL for their invaluable contributions to the study. The authors thank Victoria L. Jackson, MLIS, ELS, for her assistance with manuscript preparation and management.
The study was supported by a grant from the State of Florida James and Esther King Biomedical Research Program.
SOA contributed in interpretation of data; drafting of the manuscript; final approval of the manuscript. JEE-P contributed in analysis and interpretation of data; critically revising the article; final approval of the manuscript. NDD contributed in analysis and interpretation of data; final approval of the manuscript. DJS contributed in analysis and interpretation of data; final approval of the manuscript. KMC contributed in acquisition of data; final approval of the manuscript. MLA contributed in acquisition of data; final approval of the manuscript. KJW contributed in acquisition of data; final approval of the manuscript. JCC contributed in acquisition of data; final approval of the manuscript. DDT contributed in acquisition of data; final approval of the manuscript. BCL contributed in acquisition of data; final approval of the manuscript. ASP contributed in conception and design; analysis and interpretation of data; drafting the article; final approval of the manuscript.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflicts of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest related to this work.
The study was approved by the Mayo Clinic Institutional Review Board.
- 16.Preedy VR (2014) Processing and impact on antioxidants in beverages, 1st edn. Academic Press, San DiegoGoogle Scholar
- 17.Schapira J, Schapira K, Schapira D (1982) The book of coffee and tea: a guide to the appreciation of fine coffees, teas, and herbal beverages, 2nd edn. St. Martin’s Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 31.Arnaud M (1993) Metabolism of caffeine and other components of coffee. In: Garattini S (ed) caffeine, coffee and health. Raven Press, New York, pp 43–95Google Scholar