Volume 96, Issue 5 pp. 283-287
Free to Read

Charcoal cigarette filters and lung cancer risk in Aichi Prefecture, Japan

Joshua E. Muscat

Corresponding Author

Joshua E. Muscat

Department of Health Evaluation Sciences, Penn State Cancer Institute, Division of Population Sciences, Penn State College of Medicine, Room C3739, MC H069, 500 University Drive, Hershey, PA 17033,

To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected]Search for more papers by this author
Toshiro Takezaki

Toshiro Takezaki

Department of International Island and Community Medicine, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, 8-35-1 Sakuragaoka, Kagoshima 890–8544

Search for more papers by this author
Kazuo Tajima

Kazuo Tajima

Division of Epidemiology and Prevention, Aichi Cancer Center Research Institute, 1–1 Kanokoden Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464–8681, Japan

Search for more papers by this author
Steven D. Stellman

Steven D. Stellman

Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, 722 West 168th Street, New York, NY 10032, USA;

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 19 May 2005
Citations: 16

Abstract

The lung cancer mortality rate has been lower in Japan than in the United States for several decades. We hypothesized that this difference is due to the Japanese preference for cigarettes with charcoal-containing filters, which efficiently absorb selected gas phase components of mainstream smoke including the carcinogen 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone. We analyzed a subset of smokers (396 cases and 545 controls) from a case-control study of lung cancer conducted in Aichi Prefecture, Japan. The risk associated with charcoal filters (73% of all subjects) was evaluated after adjusting for age, sex, education and smoking dose. The odds ratio (OR) associated with charcoal compared with ‘plain’ cigarette filters was 1.2 (95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.9, 1.6). The histologic-specific risks were similar (e.g. OR = 1.3, 95% CI 0.9, 2.1 for adenocarcinoma). The OR was 1.7 (95% CI 1.1, 2.9) in smokers who switched from ‘plain’ to charcoal brands. The mean daily number of cigarettes smoked in subjects who switched from ‘plain’ to charcoal brands was 22.5 and 23.0, respectively. The findings from this study did not indicate that charcoal filters were associated with an attenuated risk of lung cancer. As the detection of a modest benefit or risk (e.g. 10–20%) that can have significant public health impact requires large samples, the findings should be confirmed or refuted in larger studies. (Cancer Sci 2005; 96: 283 –287)

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.