Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 22, 2026

Evaluation of Colorectal Cancer Risk and Prevalence by Stool DNA Integrity Detection
Published on: June 8, 2020
Dose-response meta-analysis of coffee consumption and risk of colorectal adenoma
Yong Wang1, Jing Chen2, Rui Zhao1
1Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Background:
The association between coffee and colorectal adenoma risk remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis of cohort and case-control studies to sum up the existing proof about this matter.
Methods:
We searched Pubmed, Medline, and Embase for studies published before 1 September 2018 on coffee consumption and colorectal adenoma in any language. The different ORs were calculated for cohort and case-control studies in this study, and we use a random-effects model to aggregate the relative risks of individual studies and conduct dose response, heterogeneity, and publication bias.
Results:
A total of 8 studies (6 case-control studies, 2 cohort studies) were identified, including 7090 subjects. In a summary analysis of all studies, high coffee intake (compared the highest with the lowest categories) was associated with a reduced risk of colorectal adenoma (odds ratio [OR] = 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.55-0.90). The results of subgroup analysis of adenoma location were similar with the pooled analysis, except for rectal adenoma. In the dose-response meta-analysis study, the estimated total odds ratio for increasing coffee consumption by 150 ml per day (about one cup) was 0.91 (95% CI = 0.87-0.95).
Conclusions:
The meta-analysis demonstrates possible evidence that increased coffee intake is related to a reduced risk of colon adenoma. However, because of latent confusion and different exposure classification, this finding should be carefully considered.
Related Concept Videos
Dose-Response Relationship: Overview
Dose-Response Relationship: Potency and Efficacy
Dose-Response Relationship: Selectivity and Specificity
Directing Effect of Substituents: meta-Directing Groups
Relative Risk
Dose Size and Dosing Frequency: Determination Methods

