Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
, 28 (3), 222-230

A Meta-Analysis on the Relationship Between Hair Dye and the Incidence of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

A Meta-Analysis on the Relationship Between Hair Dye and the Incidence of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Ling Qin et al. Med Princ Pract.

Abstract

Background: Epidemiologic studies have suggested hair dye to be a risk factor for many cancers. However, previous studies on the association between the personal use of hair dye and risk of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) have been inconclusive.

Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases, as well as the references cited in included studies, were searched for relevant studies up to February 10, 2015. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were applied to assess the strength of the association. Publication bias was evaluated using a funnel plot by Egger's and Begg's tests.

Results: A total of 16 studies were included in the analysis, including 13 case-control studies and 3 cohort studies. The present meta-analysis results revealed that the risk of NHL in a high population of hair dye users was 14% (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.01-1.29). Furthermore, individuals who used more than 20 pack-years of hair dye had increased risk of NHL.

Conclusion: The outcomes indicate that hair dye use increases the risk of NHL, especially for females. Hence, people who frequently use hair dyes or have been using hair dyes for more than 20 years should minimize their exposure to hair dye products to prevent the risk of NHL.

Keywords: Hair dye; Meta-analysis; Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart of the screening of articles.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest map for meta-analysis of 13 case control studies.
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Forest map for meta-analysis of 16 combined studies.
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Begg's funnel plot with pseudo 95% CIs for publication bias assessment. SE, standard error.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Publication types

Feedback