MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4211262924 · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005004.pub2

Green tea (Camellia sinensis) for the prevention of cancer

2009· article· en· W4211262924 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katja Boehm, Francesca Borrelli, Edzard Ernst, Gabi Habacher, Shao Kang Hung, Stefania Milazzo, Markus Horneber

Notice bibliographique

RevueCochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueTea Polyphenols and Effects
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineCamellia sinensisObservational studyMeta-analysisCohort studyCancer preventionCancerTraditional medicineGreen teaIncidence (geometry)Environmental healthRandomized controlled trialEpidemiologyInternal medicineFood scienceBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: 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. Cross-culturally tea drinking habits vary. Camellia sinensis contains the active ingredient polyphenol, which has a subgroup known as catechins. Catechins are powerful antioxidants. It has been suggested that green tea polyphenol may inhibit cell proliferation and observational studies have suggested that green tea may have cancer-preventative effects. OBJECTIVES: To critically assess any associations between green tea consumption and the risk of cancer incidence and mortality. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched eligible studies up to January 2009 in the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Amed, CancerLit, Psych INFO and Phytobase and reference lists of previous reviews and included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all prospective, controlled interventional studies and observational studies, which either assessed the associations between green tea consumption and risk of cancer incidence or that reported on cancer mortality. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently applied the study criteria, extracted data and assessed methodological quality of studies. Due to the nature of included studies, which were mainly epidemiological, results were summarised descriptively according to cancer diagnosis. MAIN RESULTS: Fifty-one studies with more than 1.6 million participants were included. Twenty-seven of them were case-control studies, 23 cohort studies and one randomised controlled trial (RCT).Twenty-seven studies tried to establish an association between green tea consumption and cancer of the digestive tract, mainly of the upper gastrointestinal tract, five with breast cancer, five with prostate cancer, three with lung cancer, two with ovarian cancer, two with urinary bladder cancer one with oral cancer, three further studies included patients with various cancer diagnoses.The methodological quality was measured with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). The 9 nested case-control studies within prospective cohorts were of high methodological quality, 13 of medium, and 1 of low. One retrospective case-control study was of high methodological quality and 21 of medium and 5 of low.Results from studies assessing associations between green tea and risk of digestive tract cancer incidence were highly contradictory. There was limited evidence that green tea could reduce the incidence of liver cancer. The evidence for esophageal, gastric, colon, rectum, and pancreatic cancer was conflicting. In prostate cancer, observational studies with higher methodological quality and the only included RCT suggested a decreased risk in men consuming higher quantities green tea or green tea extracts. However, there was limited to moderate evidence that the consumption of green tea reduced the risk of lung cancer, especially in men, and urinary bladder cancer or that it could even increase the risk of the latter. There was moderate to strong evidence that green tea consumption does not decrease the risk of dying from gastric cancer. There was limited moderate to strong evidence for lung, pancreatic and colorectal cancer. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient and conflicting evidence to give any firm recommendations regarding green tea consumption for cancer prevention. The results of this review, including its trends of associations, need to be interpreted with caution and their generalisability is questionable, as the majority of included studies were carried out in Asia (n = 47) where the tea drinking culture is pronounced. Desirable green tea intake is 3 to 5 cups per day (up to 1200 ml/day), providing a minimum of 250 mg/day catechins. If not exceeding the daily recommended allowance, those who enjoy a cup of green tea should continue its consumption. Drinking green tea appears to be safe at moderate, regular and habitual use.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,005
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,010
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,032

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0050,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,003
Bibliométrie0,0050,004
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0100,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,081
Tête enseignante GPT0,387
Écart entre enseignants0,306 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations157
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCochrane Database of Systematic ReviewsMême sujetTea Polyphenols and EffectsTravaux en français237 207