Table 1.
Details of European studies considered.
| First author, year of publication | Location | Study Perioda | Sex | Age | Population | Further details of study design | Endpointsb |
| Experimental studies | |||||||
| Larsson 1991 [1] | Sweden (Malmö) | 3 to 6 months | M | 21 to 70 Mean 36 | 29 snuff users with degree 2 to 4 mucosal lesions selected from Andersson 1989 [18] | Subjects advised to stop or change their habit | ML |
| Andersson 1995 [2] | Sweden (Malmö) | 12 weeks | Not given | Mean 37 | 24 users of snuff brand A, 18 users of low-nicotine snuff brand B | Subjects observed for 2 weeks, then brand A users switched to brand B for 10 weeksc | ML |
| Andersson 2003 [3] | Sweden (Malmö) | 24 weeks | Not given | Mean 34 | 20 users of snuff brand A with degree 3 or 4 lesions | Subjects switched to brand B with lower pH for 12 weeks, then to brand C with same pH as brand B but lower nicotined | ML |
| Prospective studies | |||||||
| Roosaar 2006 [4] | Sweden (Uppsala county) | 1973–1974 to 2002 | M | 15+ | 1115 men with "snus-induced lesions" in 1973–1974 followed up | Selected from 7890 men examined | ML |
| Case-control studies | |||||||
| Rosenquist 2005 [5] | Sweden (South) | 2001 to 2004 | M+F | 33 to 87 | 132 cases of oral and oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinomas, 320 population controls | Cases and controls matched on age ± 3 years, sex and county | ML |
| Cross-sectional studies of populations unselected by ST use | |||||||
| Tyldesley 1971 [50] | England (Lancashire) | Not given | M | Not given | 402 coal miners | - | ML |
| Modéer 1980 [6] | Sweden (Stockholm) | Not given | M+F | 13 to 14 Mean 13.5 | 232 school children | - | PD |
| Jungell 1985 [7] | Finland (Tammisaari) | Not given | M | 17 to 29 | 441 military recruits | - | ML |
| Salonen 1990 [8] | Sweden (Älvsborg county) | 1983 To 1984 | Me | 20+ | 477 randomly selected male adults | - | ML |
| Hirsch 1991 [9] | Sweden (Gothenburg) | Not given | M+F | 14 to 19 Mean 16.8 | 2145 teenagers attending for dental check-up | - | DC |
| Wickholm 2004 [10] | Sweden (National) | 1985 | M+F | 31 to 40 | 1674 adults born on 20th of month | - | PD |
| Bergström 2006 [11] | Sweden (National) | 2002 to 2003 | M | 26 to 54 | 84 submariners | - | PD, DC |
| Montén 2006 [12] | Sweden (Göteborg) | Not given | M | 19 | 103 never smokers | Subsample from larger epidemiological study | PD |
| Cross-sectional studies of populations selected by ST use and/or presence of oral lesions | |||||||
| Pindborg 1963 [13] | Denmark (Copenhagen) | Not given | M | 39 to 83 | 12 long-term snuff users | SIL probable inclusion criterion | ML |
| Roed-Petersen 1973 [14] | Denmark (Copenhagen) | 1956 to 1970 | M+F | < 20 to 90+ Mean 55 | 450 oral leukoplakia patients | - | ML, OP |
| Axéll 1976 [15] | Sweden (Not given) | Not given | M | 20 to 88 Mean 50 | 114 snuff users with oral lesions | - | ML |
| Hirsch 1982 [16] | Sweden (Gothenburg) | Not given | M | 15 to 84 Mean 41 | 50 habitual snuff users | SIL probable inclusion criterion | ML |
| Frithiof 1983 [17] | Sweden (Stockholm) | Not given | M | 31 to 79 Mean 55 | 21 long-term snuff users referred to dental school for oral lesions | - | ML, PD |
| Andersson 1989 [18] | Sweden (Malmö) | 1986 to 1987 | M | 17 to 80 Mean 36 | 252 snuff users; construction and shipyard workers and outpatients | - | ML, PD |
| Andersson 1994 [19] | Sweden (Malmö) | Not given | M | 21 to 75 Mean 42 | 45 habitual snuff users and 9 users of CT selected from Andersson 1989 [18] | Loose and portion-bag users matched on consumption and usage | ML |
| Rolandsson 2005 [20] | Sweden (Värmland) | Not given | M | 16 to 25 Mean 21 | 80 ice hockey players, of which 40 were snuff users and 40 non users | Snuff users and non users age matched | ML, PD, DC |
a Length of follow-up period for experimental studies, period of follow-up for prospective studies, and time study conducted otherwise
b DC = dental caries, ML = mucosal lesion, OP = oral pain, PD = periodontal or gingival diseases
c Brand A 0.8–0.9% nicotine, 8.2–8.5 pH; Brand B 0.4–0.5% nicotine, 7.8–8.2 pH
d Brand A 0.8% nicotine, 8.6 pH; Brand B 0.8% nicotine, 8.0 pH; Brand C 0.4–0.5% nicotine, 8.0 pH
e Women were also studied but none used snuff