Systematic review of tobacco use after lung or head/neck cancer diagnosis: Results and recommendations for future research

Jessica L. Burris, Jamie L. Studts, Antonio P. DeRosa, Jamie S. Ostroff

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

71 Scopus citations

Abstract

Tobacco use after cancer diagnosis is associated with adverse cancer outcomes, yet reliable prevalence estimates for this behavior are lacking. We conducted a systematic literature review of the prevalence of current tobacco use among individuals with a history of lung or head/neck cancer (CRD #42012002625). An extensive search of electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science) identified 7,777 potentially relevant articles published between 1980 and 2014 and 131 of these yielded pertinent information. Aggregating results across heterogeneous study designs and diverse patient samples, the overall mean prevalence rate of current tobacco use (mostly cigarette smoking) was 33.0% (median, 31.0%). Among current tobacco users at cancer diagnosis, the mean prevalence rate of current tobacco use (mostly cigarette smoking) was 53.8% (median, 50.3%). In many cases, an operational definition of "current" tobacco use was absent, and biochemical verification of self-reported smoking status was infrequent. These and other observed methodologic limitations in the assessment and reporting of cancer patients' tobacco use underscore the necessity of uniform tobacco use assessment in future clinical research and cancer care.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1450-1461
Number of pages12
JournalCancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention
Volume24
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 1 2015

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 American Association for Cancer Research.

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Medicine

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Systematic review of tobacco use after lung or head/neck cancer diagnosis: Results and recommendations for future research'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this