Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Int J Cancer. 2009 Aug 1;125(3):491–524. doi: 10.1002/ijc.24445

Table 4.

A summary of studies on the association between high temperature foods or drinks (other than tea, coffee and maté, unless the results have been reported as a combination of them) and risk of esophageal cancer

First author;
year of
publication
(Country;
period of
study)		 Case /
control a 		Food or drink temperature OR/RR (95% CI)b Comments
(1. Study design; 2. histological subtypes of EC, if available; 3. matching criteria, if applicable; and
4. the adjustments in statistical models that were done for the presented results)
De Jong; 197441

(Singapore;
1970–1972)		 131 / 665 Barely temperature (men)
Other
Burning hot
(women)
Other
Burning hot

1
6.97 (P < 0.01)

1
15.28 (P < 0.01)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study

  2. EC was confirmed histologically in 82% of cases, all were ESCC

  3. Controls were individually matched for age and sex

  4. Results are adjusted for dialect group
Astini; 199088*

(Ethiopia; 1988–
1989)		 25 / 50 High temperature food
Non-user
User

1
36.0 (4.5–287.8)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study

  2. EC was diagnosed on the basis of clinical symptoms and radiological signs

  3. Controls were individually matched for age, sex and visiting the same hospital at the same time

  4. In the matched analysis that was presented in the article, the OR (95% CI) could not be calculated (because most cells contained zeros)
Cheng; 199289
and 199590

(Hong Kong;
1989–1990)		 400 / 1598 (68
never smoker &
52 never
drinker / 540
never smoker &
407 never
drinker)		 Preference for hot drinks or soups
(all participants)
No
Yes
(never smokers)
No
Yes
(never drinkers)
No
Yes


1
1.64 (1.30–2.08)

1
1.51 (0.80–2.83)

1
1.76 (0.90–3.45)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study. For each case, 2 controls were selected from the same hospital as the cases; 2 other controls were enrolled from the same clinic from which the cases were originally referred

  2. All cases were histologically confirmed EC (85% ESCC, 12% EAC, and 3% other)

  3. Controls were individually matched for age and sex

  4. For all participants, the matched results were adjusted for age, education, and birth place; for never smokers and never drinkers, the matched results were adjusted for age, sex, education, place of birth, fruit and vegetable intake, and tobacco and alcohol use
Hu; 199451

(China; 1985–
1989)		 196 / 392 Eaten gruel temperature
Cold
Mild
Hot
Scalding

1
1.1 (0.4–3.4)
2.4 (0.9–6.4)
5.3 (1.4–20.9)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study

  2. All cases were histologically confirmed EC; no information about EC subtypes was reported

  3. Controls were individually matched for age, sex, and area of residence

  4. The matched results were adjusted for tobacco and alcohol use, income, and occupation
Gao, YT; 199452

and 199491

(China; 1990–
1993)		 902 / 1552 Burning hot fluids (men)
No + no green tea drinking
Yes + no green tea drinking
No + green tea drinking
Yes + green tea drinking
(women)
No + no green tea drinking
Yes + no green tea drinking
No + green tea drinking
Yes + green tea drinking
Soup/porridge (men)
Cold/lukewarm
Hot
Burning hot
(women)
Cold/lukewarm
Hot
Burning hot

1
4.80 (2.85–8.08)
0.88 (0.61–1.29)
3.09 (1.94–4.93)

1
4.78 (2.89–7.90)
0.50 (0.27–0.91)
2.00 (0.75–5.07)

1
1.21 (0.88–1.66)
4.75 (3.33–6.79)

1
1.90 (1.29–2.79)
6.77 (4.09–11.20)

  1. Population-based case-control study

  2. EC was confirmed histologically in 81% of cases (of them: 83% ESCC, 7% EAC, 3% other, 7% unspecified)

  3. Controls were frequency matched to cases with 4 types of GI cancer cases in the original study (in accordance with the age and sex distribution among the cases)

  4. Results for burning hot fluids consumption were adjusted for age, education, birthplace, and tobacco and alcohol use. Results for soup/porridge temperature were adjusted for age, education, birthplace, tea drinking, tobacco and alcohol use, and consumption of preserved foods, vegetables and fruit
Hanaoka;
199492

(Japan; 1989–
1991)		 141 / 141 High temperature food and drink
Dislike
Indifferent
Like

1
2.06 (0.94–4.52)
2.99 (1.18–7.55)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study; only male participants. 64% of controls had another malignant neoplasm

  2. All cases had histologically confirmed EC. No information about EC subtypes was reported

  3. Controls were individually matched for age, sex, and place of residence

  4. The matched results were adjusted for alcohol use
Guo; 199493

(China; 1986–
1991)
and

Tran; 200594

(China; 1986–
2001)		 640 / 3200 Hot liquids
0 time/month
1+ times/month

1
0.9 (0.7–1.0)

  1. Nested case-control study

  2. EC was diagnosed on the basis of radiological signs, cytology, or histology. Nearly all cases with a microscopic diagnosis had ESCC

  3. Controls were individually matched for age and sex

  4. The matched results were adjusted for cancer history in first degree relatives and smoking
1958 / 29584 Hot liquid in summer
0 time/year
1+ times/year
Hot liquid in winter
0 time/year
1+ times/year

1
0.96 (0.87–1.07)

1
0.95 (0.87–1.04)

  1. Cohort study; controls were non-cancer members of the cohort

  2. All cases had histologically confirmed EC; only ESCC cases

  3. No matching was reported

  4. Results were adjusted for age and sex
Srivastava;
199553

(India; not
reported)		 75 / 75 Food temperature
Warm
Hot

1
NS/NR

  1. Hospital-based case-control study

  2. All cases were histologically confirmed EC (85% ESCC, 15% EAC)

  3. No matching was reported

  4. In the stepwise multivariate analysis, tea temperature variable was dropped out because it did not have any significant association with the risk (in the final model only vegetable intake and alcohol use had significant associations with the risk)

  • Note: preference for high temperature food showed a significant association with ESCC risk in the crude analyses
Garidou; 199680

(Greece; 1989–
1991)		 43 ESCC and
56 EAC / 200		 Preference for beverage & food
(ESCC)
Cold to hot
Very hot
(EAC)
Cold to hot
Very hot
(ESCC + EAC)
Cold to hot
Very hot

1
1.89 (0.80–4.49)

1
1.82 (0.85–3.91)

1
>1 (NR, P = 0.02)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study

  2. All cases had histologically confirmed EC (43% ESCC, 57% EAC)

  3. Controls were individually Matched for age and sex

  4. Results are adjusted for age, sex, birthplace, education, height, analgesics, coffee drinking, tobacco and alcohol use, and energy intake
Castellsagué;
200058

(Argentina,
Brazil, Uruguay,
Paraguay;
1986–1992)		 830 / 1779 Beverage temperature
(any beverage, excluding maté)
Never very hot
Ever very hot
(any beverage, including maté)
Never very hot
Ever very hot

1
2.45 (1.72–3.49)

1
2.07 (1.55–2.76)

  1. A pooled analysis of 5 other hospital-based case-control studies 35–38; the results from Uruguay came from 2 studies: one from 1985 to 1988 38 and the other was an extension of that study (1989–1992)

  2. Cases from Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay had histologically confirmed ESCC; in Paraguay, a cytological or radiological diagnosis of EC was acceptable

  3. Controls were individually matched for age and sex, admission to the same hospital and during the same period as the corresponding case

  4. Results are adjusted for age group, sex, hospital, residency, education, tobacco and alcohol use
Nayar; 200060

(India; 1994–
1997)		 150 / 150 Food temperature
Warm
Hot

1
0.68 (NS/NR)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study

  2. All cases had histologically confirmed EC. No information about EC subtypes was reported

  3. Controls were individually matched for age, sex, and socioeconomic status

  4. For food temperature variable, only crude analysis was done
Phukan; 200195

(India; 1997–
1998)		 502 / 1004 Food temperature
Moderate
Cold
Hot

1
1.2 (0.04–4.1)
2.8 (P <0.05)
[See Note]

  1. Hospital-based case-control study

  2. All cases had histologically confirmed EC. No information about EC subtypes was reported

  3. Controls were individually matched for age and sex initially. Some cases and controls were dropped later on, the pairing identity was not retained

  4. Results were adjusted for education, income, chewing betel nut and tobacco and alcohol use

  • Note: For hot food category, the P value and 95% CI for the OR was reported as <0.05 and 0.6– 7.5, respectively. The statement in the text is “ingestion of food at very high temperature emerged as a very significant factor (OR=6.5) that seemed to persist, although in lower magnitude, even after adjustment for the other variables (OR=2.8)”. Therefore, we considered that association as statistically significant
Yokoyama;
200296*

(Japan; 2000–
2001)		 234 / 634 Preference for high temperature food
(categories: Dislike very much, Dislike
somewhat, Neither like nor dislike, Like
somewhat, Like very much)		 NS/NR

  1. Hospital-based case-control study, only male participants

  2. All cases were histologically confirmed EC; only ESCC cases

  3. No other matching was reported

  4. Results were adjusted for age and tobacco and alcohol use

  • Note: preference for high temperature food showed a significant association with ESCC risk in the crude analyses
Hung; 200470

(Taiwan; 1996–
2002)		 365 / 532 Hot drink or soup
(age 20–40 years)
<3 times/week
3+ times/week
(age 40+ years)
<3 times/week
3+ times/week
Eating overheated food
(age 20–40 years)
No
Yes
(age 40+ years)
No
Yes


1
1.8 (1.1–3.0)

1
1.3 (0.8–2.1)


1
2.7 (1.6–4.4)

1
2.1 (1.3–3.4)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study, only male participants

  2. All cases were histologically confirmed EC; only ESCC cases

  3. Controls were individually matched for age, and hospitalization date

  4. Results were adjusted for age, education, ethnicity, hospital location, tobacco, alcohol use and areca nut chewing
Yang; 200572

(China; 2003–
2004)		 185 / 185 Eating high temperature food
Rarely
Occasionally
Often

1
0.43 (0.17–1.09)
0.40 (0.14–1.16)

  1. Case-control study; hospital-based cases, population-based controls

  2. All cases had histologically confirmed EC; 179 ESCC cases and 6 EAC cases

  3. Controls were individually matched for age, sex

  4. The matched results were adjusted for family history of EC, occupation, tobacco and alcohol use, some dietary items, including fruit and vegetable intake, hot food, water supply, eating speed, and intake of pickled vegetables, fresh meat, processed meat, eggs and tea
Yokoyama;
200697

(Japan; 2000–
2004)		 52 / 412 Preference for hot food or drinks
Dislike very much
Dislike somewhat
Neither like nor dislike
Like somewhat
Like very much

1
0.21 (0.01–3.60)
1.00 (0.12–8.17)
1.53 (0.18–12.92)
3.43 (0.39–30.46)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study, only female participants

  2. All cases were histologically confirmed EC; only ESCC cases

  3. No other matching was reported

  4. Results were adjusted for age
Wu, M; 200698

(China; 2003–
2005)		 531 / 531
(291 / 291
from a high risk
and 240 / 240
from a low risk
area)		 Food temperature (high risk area)
Normal
Hot
(low risk area)
Normal
Hot

1
0.51 (0.24–1.09)

1
1.14 (0.55–2.41)

  1. Population-based case-control study

  2. Of all the EC cases in the high-risk are (Dafeng), 46% were histologically confirmed, and 40% and 13% were diagnosed by endoscopy and radiology, respectively. In the low-risk area (Ganyu), 30% of EC cases were histologically confirmed, and 50% and 16% were diagnosed by endoscopy and radiology, respectively.

  3. Controls were individually matched for age and sex

  4. The matched results were adjusted for education, BMI, tobacco and alcohol use, family history of cancer, eating speed, and self-reported grain contamination with fungi
Wang, JM;
200775

(China; 2004–
2006)		 355 / 408
(223/252 men,
132/156
women)		 Food temperature (men)
Warm
Hot
(women)
Warm
Hot

1
2.13 (1.39–3.25)

1
3.05 (1.73–5.36)

  1. Population-based case-control study

  2. All cases were histologically confirmed EC; only ESCC cases

  3. Controls were matched for age and sex

  4. Results were adjusted for age, marital status, and education

  • Note: Cases were enrolled from patients referred to one hospital, but they accounted for 85% of all histologically confirmed ECs in the study area during the study period
Rossini; 200882*

(Brazil; 1995–
2000)		 36 / 290 Hot drinks
<1 time a week
1–2 times a week
3–4 times a week
5+ times a week
Food temperature
Cool
Warm
Hot

1
0.69 (0.20–2.41)
0.71 (0.09–5.75)
1.14 (0.44–2.97)

1
1.13 (0.27–4.66)
0.98 (0.20–4.82)

  1. Hospital-based case-control study. Cases were head and neck cancer cases with second primary ESCC. Controls were head and neck cancer cases without second primary ESCC

  2. All cases were histologically confirmed EC; only ESCC cases

  3. No matching was reported

  4. No adjustment was reported

Abbreviations: EAC, esophageal adenocarcinoma; ESCC, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma; OR, odds ratio; RR, relative risk;95% CI, 95% confidence interval.

a

Number of cases and controls

b

If studies reported both crude and adjusted ORs (95% CIs), we only present the adjusted results.

*

These studies showed crude numbers but not ORs and 95% CIs; we calculated these statistics using simple logistic regression models and present them.