This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Peter M. Layde, MD, MSc

JAMA. 1989;261(11):1631-1633.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In the debate on the role of cigarette smoking in the etiology of cervical cancer, there is one central point of agreement: women who smoke cigarettes are more likely to develop cervical neoplasia than are nonsmokers. Beyond that key point, however, there is considerable controversy. The basic question is whether the association of smoking and cervical cancer is causal, mediated by some biologically plausible mechanism, or artifactual, produced by some extraneous confounding difference between smokers and nonsmokers. The noteworthy article by Slattery and collegues¹ in this issue of THE JOURNAL will open a new controversy in this area by suggesting an etiologic role of passive exposure to the smoke of others' cigarettes in cervical carcinogenesis. In addition, Slattery and colleagues have reopened the long-standing, more general debate about whether cervical cancer should be added to the list of tobacco-induced cancers.

Winkelstein's² insightful recognition of the similarity of cervical . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Marshfield Medical Research Foundation Marshfield, Wis

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?