Skip to main content
Download PDF

Association of smoking with cartilage loss of knee osteoarthritis: data from two longitudinal cohorts

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders volume 24, Article number: 812 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Previous studies have been inconsistent concerning the association between smoking and risk of osteoarthritis (OA). This study aimed to explore the associations of smoking status and change in cartilage volume of OA in two longitudinal cohorts.

Methods

Subjects from the Osteoarthritis Initiative cohort (OAI, n = 593) and the Tasmanian Older Adult Cohort (TASOAC, n = 394) were included in this study. For both cohorts, participants were classified into three groups based on their smoking status, namely ‘never’, ‘former’, and ‘current’ smokers. The outcome measures were the annual rate of change of tibiofemoral cartilage volume over 2 years in OAI and of tibial cartilage volume over 2.6 years in TASOAC. Potential confounders were balanced using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method.

Results

Overall, 42.3% and 37.4% of participants were former smokers, and 5.7% and 9.3% were current smokers in the OAI and TASOAC cohorts, respectively. Compared to never smokers, neither former nor current smoking was associated with risk of the annual rate of change of tibiofemoral cartilage volume in OAI (former smoker: β=-0.068%/year, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.824 to 0.688, p = 0.860; current smoker: β=-0.222%/year, 95% CI -0.565 to 0.120, p = 0.204) and tibial cartilage volume in TASOAC (former smoker: β = 0.001%/year, 95% CI -0.986 to 0.989, p = 0.998; current smoker: β=-0.839%/year, 95% CI -2.520 to 0.844, p = 0.329).

Conclusions

Our findings from two independent cohorts consistently showed that smoking was not associated with knee cartilage loss in older adults.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most common joint disease that can lead to pain, functional disability, and impaired quality of life [1]. Worldwide, over 300 million individuals have symptomatic OA, and the prevalence is increasing with age [2]. Numerous studies have demonstrated that person-level risk factors (e.g., age, gender, overweight, occupation, and genetics) and joint-level adverse factors (e.g., injury and malalignment) play a role in the development of OA [3,4,5,6]. At the population level, understanding lifestyle factors that associated with the development of OA is critically important for enhancing the management of OA.

Smoking causes more than 8 million deaths each year and is a major risk factor for lung cancer as well as cardiovascular and respiratory diseases [7, 8]. However, the association between smoking and OA is ambiguous. While a recent Mendelian randomization study showed that smoking may increase OA risk [9], many population-based studies observed a protective effect of smoking on OA [10, 11]. In a meta-analysis of observational studies, an inverse association between smoking and OA was found only in hospital-based case-control studies but not in cohort or cross-sectional studies [12]. In a more recent meta-analysis, however, the authors showed a consistent inverse association between smoking and OA, irrespective of study setting and design [13]. It has been indicated that the association between smoking and OA may be biased by methodologic issues and residual confounding, especially obesity [14]. Moreover, most studies have focused on evaluating the effect of smoking on the radiographic progression of OA [13], which is less sensitive than structural abnormalities measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) [15]. One small study used a semiquantitative measure of cartilage score on MRI showing that current smokers (n = 19) had greater cartilage loss and more severe knee pain than non-current smokers in men with symptomatic knee OA [16], and another study had similar findings that smoking led to greater cartilage loss and defect in a younger population with a family history of OA [17].

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the effect of smoking on cartilage loss of knee OA in two longitudinal cohorts.

Methods

Study design and participants

The report of this study followed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement [18]. We used data from the Osteoarthritis Initiative (OAI) and the Tasmanian Older Adult Cohort (TASOAC).

The OAI is a publicly available multicenter longitudinal project conducted in four centers in the United States (https://nda.nih.gov/oai/). A total of 4,796 participants (age 45 to 79 years) with or at increased risk of symptomatic knee OA were enrolled. For this study, we included 593 participants who had data on smoking status and underwent MRI assessments at baseline and the 2-year follow-up. Ethics approvals were obtained from the institutional review board at each of the four clinical centers that recruited OAI participants. All participants provided informed consent.

The Tasmanian Older Adult Cohort (TASOAC) is a prospective study in southern Tasmania, Australia [19]. A total of 1099 participants aged 50 to 79 were selected using a sex-stratified random sampling in southern Tasmania (population 229,000), 98% of whom were white. The current study included 394 participants who had data on smoking status and underwent MRI assessments at baseline and the 2.6-year follow-up. All participants provided written informed consent, and the Southern Tasmanian Health and Medical Human Research Ethics Committee approved this study.

Outcome measures

In the OAI cohort, data on cartilage volume at baseline and 2 years follow-up were obtained from the Osteoarthritis Biomarkers Consortium FNIH Project, which were computed using a fully automatic computer-based framework called KneeIQ [20]. Three measurements of cartilage volume were conducted for the medial femur and medial tibial plateau, lateral femur and lateral tibial plateau, and the patellar site. Cartilage volume was analyzed in the entire knee and subregions including the medial and the lateral tibiofemoral compartments and the medial and the lateral condyles and plateaus. In this study, we summed the quantifications of the cartilage volume of each participant, and the annual rate of change over 2 years (%/year) was measured as 100 × [(baseline cartilage volume − follow-up cartilage volume)/baseline cartilage volume]/time between two scans in years.

In the TASOAC cohort, MRI of the right knee was performed for each participant at baseline and 2.6 years follow-up. Tibial (medial and lateral) cartilage volume was assessed paired with known chronology using T1-weighted fat-suppressed three-dimensional gradient recall acquisition in the steady state, flip angle 55°, repetition time 58 msec, echo time 12 msec, field of view 16 cm, 60 partitions and 512 × 512 matrix. The intra-observer coefficient of variation (CV) for cartilage volume measures was 2.1% for the medial tibial and 2.2% for the lateral tibial [21]. Annual rate of change in total tibial cartilage volume over 2.6 years (%/year) was measured as 100 × [(baseline cartilage volume − follow-up cartilage volume)/baseline cartilage volume]/time between two scans in years.

Smoking status

Smoking history was recorded at baseline by self-reported questionnaire in both cohorts. In the OAI, smoking status was defined as never, former, and current smoker, based on two questions: ‘Have you smoked at least 100 cigarettes (five packs) in your entire life?’, and ‘Do you smoke cigarettes now?’. In the TASOAC, the same smoking status (i.e. never, former, and current smoker) was defined based on two questions: ‘Have you ever been a ‘regular smoker’ (i.e. someone who has smoked at least 7 cigarettes, cigars or pipes every week for at least 3 months)?’, and ‘Are you currently a ‘regular smoker’?’.

Covariates

Covariates were selected based on previous studies for their potential confounding effects on the association between smoking and OA [22,23,24]. Age (year), gender, body mass index (BMI, kg/m2), radiographic OA (based on the Kellgren-Lawrence grades) [25], education level, income, marital status, race (white, black, and other), physical activity (the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly) [26], history of knee surgery (other than knee replacement), history of knee injury, and family history of OA were selected as covariates in the OAI cohort.

The same covariates were used in the TASOAC cohort, with the following exceptions: (1) most participants were white and thus race was not selected as a covariate; (2) marital status, income, and family history of OA were not recorded; (3) history of knee injury was evaluated at the 2.6-year follow-up rather than at baseline; (4) physical activity was evaluated as steps/day using a pedometer (Omron HJ–003 and HJ-102, Omron Healthcare, Kyoto, Japan). Participants were instructed to wear a pedometer for 7 consecutive days with a 6-month interval, and the average steps were calculated at both time points to account for seasonal variation [27]; (5) radiographic OA was defined as the presence of any joint space narrowing (JSN) or osteophytes, according to the Osteoarthritis Research Society International (OARSI) atlas [28].

Statistical analysis

Baseline characteristics were presented as mean (standard deviation, SD) and n (%). Analysis of variance, Chi-square test and Kruskal-Wallis test were utilized for the comparison of different groups. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method based on propensity scores (PS) was used to achieve covariate balance between the three groups at baseline for each of the two cohorts [29, 30]. PS was the probability of being in one of the three groups conditional on observed covariates and was calculated using multinomial logistic regression models, with smoking status as a dependent variable. In the OAI cohort, twelve variables used for calculating PS, which included age, gender, BMI, radiographic OA, education level, income, marital status, race, physical activity, history of knee surgery, history of knee injury, and family history of OA. In the TASOAC cohort, eight variables were used for calculating PS, which included age, gender, BMI, education level, physical activity, radiographic OA, history of knee surgery, and history of knee injury. The weights were obtained by taking the inverse of the probability of being in one of the three smoking groups. The truncation value was set at 0.01 to minimize the impact of extreme weights, where the weights at the 1st to 99th percentiles were kept [31]. Moreover, the stabilized weights approach was used to increase statistical efficiency and attain better coverage of confidence intervals [32]. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was measured to determine the covariate balance pre- and post-IPTW, with SMD > 0.1 indicating an imbalance. Linear regression models were used to assess the associations of smoking status with the annual percentage change of cartilage volume for the OAI and TASOAC cohorts, respectively. Models adjusted for PS-based weights and the imbalanced covariates after weighting (i.e. SMD > 0.1). Considering the potential moderating effect of age and family history of OA [17], the interactions of smoking status with age in groups (< 60; 60–70; ≥70) and family history of OA were evaluated, in which the interaction between smoking status and family history of OA was only evaluated in the OAI due to data availability. The assumptions of linear regression were tested for each of these models.

Two sensitivity analyses were conducted in this study. First, it has been suggested that BMI may be a mediator for the association between smoking and OA and that adjusting for BMI may introduce collider-stratification bias [14]. Therefore, we performed IPTW by not balancing baseline BMI. Second, multiple imputation with chained equations (MICE) was adopted to account for missing data (0.17–5.23% missing in OAI, and 0.25–4.82% missing in TASOAC), assuming missing at random. Five imputed datasets were created and the IPTW approach was adopted for each imputed dataset, and the final results were pooled using Rubin’s rules.

All statistical analyses were performed by R software (version 4.2.0; http://www.Rproject.org). Statistical significance was set at a p value of ≤ 0.05 (two-tailed).

Results

Participants

In the OAI cohort, 593 participants (59.3% female, mean age 61.6 ± 8.9 years [range 45.0–79.0]) were enrolled in this study, and the baseline characteristics splitting by smoking status were shown in Additional file 1. Table 1 summarized the baseline characteristics of 546 participants with complete data. The main between-group difference was age, sex, BMI, income, marital status, race, educational level, and history of knee surgery.

Table 1 Baseline Characteristics of OAI cohort, Pre- and Post-IPTW
Full size table

In the TASOAC cohort, 394 participants (49.7% female, mean age 63.1 ± 7.2 years [range 51.1–79.7]) were enrolled in this study, and the baseline characteristics splitting by smoking status were shown in Additional file 2. Table 2 summarized the baseline characteristics of 366 participants with complete data. The main between-group difference was age, sex, BMI, history of knee injury, and education level. After weighting, all covariates except for education level were balanced (SMD < 0.1).

Table 2 Baseline Characteristics of TASOAC cohort, Pre- and Post-IPTW
Full size table

Smoking status and OA

In the OAI cohort, smoking status was not associated with the risk of the average rate of tibiofemoral cartilage volume loss over 24 months (Table 3). No statistically significant interactions of smoking status with age in groups and family history of OA were found (all p > 0.1).

Table 3 Association between smoking status and cartilage loss of OA
Full size table

In the TASOAC cohort, smoking status was not associated with the average rate of total tibial cartilage loss (Table 3). No statistically significant interaction between smoking status and age in groups was found (p > 0.1).

Linear regression models for the association between smoking status and cartilage loss were tested and were not violated.

Sensitivity analyses

The omission of BMI from baseline covariates and multiple imputations for missing data did not change the main results (Additional file 3 & 4).

Discussion

In this longitudinal study of two community-dwelling cohorts (OAI and TASOAC), we found that smoking was not associated with cartilage volume loss after balancing baseline covariates using an IPTW method. The findings of this study do not support that there is any role of smoking in cartilage loss of knee OA.

The association between smoking and OA is still in debate. Several mechanisms by which smoking may be associated with OA have been proposed. For example, smoking has been shown to impair bone healing [33], and nicotine also diminishes the function of osteoblasts, leading to tissue hypoxia, which induces osteoclast activity and bone resorption. Moreover, an increased systemic inflammation has been found in smokers, which may play an important role in the development of OA [34, 35]. However, inconsistent findings were reported in over 10 prospective cohort studies evaluating the associations of smoking with clinical and radiographic progression of OA [12, 13]. Three studies indicated a protective effect of smoking on the risk of radiographic OA (i.e. KL ≥ 2) [10, 36, 37], and some showed a similar but statistically nonsignificant trend [38,39,40,41,42]. Using data from two longitudinal cohorts, we did not find a statistically significant or clinically important effect of smoking on MRI-detected cartilage volume loss, a more sensitive measure of cartilage loss of OA. The 95% CIs for the association between smoking and annual rate of cartilage loss were mostly within 1%/year, indicating a relatively small effect [43]. While the findings on cartilage loss of OA were consistent, we did not evaluate the association of smoking with symptomatic progression of OA. Despite this, a study from the OAI has shown that smoking was not associated with change in knee symptoms over 72 months [44]. In contrast, some previous studies suggested a protective effect of smoking on risk of clinical OA [40] and total knee replacement (TKR) [41, 42], and some others indicated that smokers were more likely to have painful OA [16] or clinician-diagnosed OA [9]. Thus, the role of smoking in symptomatic progression of OA needs further research.

Obesity is a well-documented risk factor for OA, and smokers often have lower BMI [45, 46]. Therefore, BMI is proposed to be a mediator for the association between smoking and risk of OA, and adjusting for BMI may introduce collider-stratification bias since low BMI may also be induced by other unmeasured factors (e.g., a gene) [14]. In this study, however, the lack of association between smoking and cartilage loss of OA was not changed before and after adjusting for BMI, suggesting a robust result. In addition, no statistically significant interactions of smoking with age group and family history of OA were found. This contrasts to a previous study showing that smoking increased cartilage loss and defects in participants with a family history of OA [17].

The main strength of our study was the inclusion of two independent, community-dwelling cohorts. Moreover, MRI-detected cartilage volume was used to quantify the cartilage loss of OA. Limitations of the current study are worth noting. First, this was an observational study and residual confounding cannot be avoided. However, the IPTW method that we used is superior to the conventional adjustment approach in simulating randomized trials and estimating the causal effect [47]. Besides, some covariates measured in the OAI were not available in the TASOAC, but the consistent findings from the two cohorts suggest that this may not be a significant issue. Second, the intensity of smoke exposure is likely to be dynamic but smoking history was retrospectively obtained and classified into only three categories. Moreover, the duration, frequency, and intensity of smoking or change in smoking status may also play a role in the progression of OA [48]. Third, selection bias may exist in our study, especially in the dataset from the OAI cohort, as indicated by the significant differences between participants selected and not selected from the OAI. Moreover, the between-group imbalances in the OAI cohort were not well controlled even after IPTW. Nonetheless, we have taken these imbalances into account by further adjusting for them. Furthermore, cartilage degeneration is a slow process, and the follow-up duration in this study may not be sufficient to observe significant changes in relation to smoking. Lastly, although we included as many participants as we could in this study, the sample size was modest and formal sample size calculated were not conducted. Therefore, this study may have been underpowered to observe a statistically significant association between smoking and cartilage loss. However, the 95% CI of the results suggested that the association was small and unlikely to be clinically important, as discussed above.

In conclusion, the findings from two independent cohorts consistently showed that smoking was not associated with knee cartilage loss in older adults.

Data Availability

The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

BMI:

body mass index

CI:

confidence interval

CV:

coefficient of variation

IPTW:

inverse probability of treatment weighting

JSN:

joint space narrowing

MICE:

multiple imputation with chained equations

MRI:

magnetic resonance imaging

OA:

osteoarthritis

OAI:

Osteoarthritis Initiative cohort

OARSI:

Osteoarthritis Research Society International

PS:

propensity scores

SD:

standard deviation

SMD:

standardized mean difference

STROBE:

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology

TASOAC:

Tasmanian Older Adult Cohort

TKR:

total knee replacement

References

  1. Chen L, Yu Y. Exercise and Osteoarthritis. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2020;1228:219–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Disease GBD, Injury I, Prevalence C. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 354 Diseases and injuries for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the global burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet. 2018;392(10159):1789–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Sun X, Zhen X, Hu X, Li Y, Gu S, Gu Y et al. Osteoarthritis in the Middle-aged and Elderly in China: prevalence and influencing factors. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(23).

  4. Hulshof CTJ, Pega F, Neupane S, van der Molen HF, Colosio C, Daams JG, et al. The prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors: a systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the work-related Burden of Disease and Injury. Environ Int. 2021;146:106157.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Boer CG, Hatzikotoulas K, Southam L, Stefansdottir L, Zhang Y, Coutinho de Almeida R, et al. Deciphering osteoarthritis genetics across 826,690 individuals from 9 populations. Cell. 2021;184(18):4784–818. e17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Gessl I, Popescu M, Schimpl V, Supp G, Deimel T, Durechova M, et al. Role of joint damage, malalignment and inflammation in articular tenderness in rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2021;80(7):884–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Malhotra J, Malvezzi M, Negri E, La Vecchia C, Boffetta P. Risk factors for Lung cancer worldwide. Eur Respir J. 2016;48(3):889–902.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Münzel T, Hahad O, Kuntic M, Keaney JF, Deanfield JE, Daiber A. Effects of Tobacco cigarettes, e-cigarettes, and waterpipe Smoking on endothelial function and clinical outcomes. Eur Heart J. 2020;41(41):4057–70.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Ni J, Wang P, Yin KJ, Huang JX, Tian T, Cen H, et al. Does Smoking protect against developing osteoarthritis? Evidence from a genetically informed perspective. Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2022;55:152013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Felson DT, Anderson JJ, Naimark A, Hannan MT, Kannel WB, Meenan RF. Does Smoking protect against osteoarthritis? Arthritis Rheum. 1989;32(2):166–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Anderson JJ, Felson DT. Factors associated with osteoarthritis of the knee in the first national Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (HANES I). Evidence for an association with overweight, race, and physical demands of work. Am J Epidemiol. 1988;128(1):179–89.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Hui M, Doherty M, Zhang W. Does Smoking protect against osteoarthritis? Meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Rheum Dis. 2011;70(7):1231–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kong L, Wang L, Meng F, Cao J, Shen Y. Association between Smoking and risk of knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2017;25(6):809–16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Felson DT, Zhang Y. Smoking and osteoarthritis: a review of the evidence and its implications. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2015;23(3):331–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Guermazi A, Roemer FW, Burstein D, Hayashi D. Why radiography should no longer be considered a surrogate outcome measure for longitudinal assessment of cartilage in knee osteoarthritis. Arthritis Res Ther. 2011;13(6):247.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Amin S, Niu J, Guermazi A, Grigoryan M, Hunter DJ, Clancy M, et al. Cigarette Smoking and the risk for cartilage loss and knee pain in men with knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 2007;66(1):18–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Ding C, Cicuttini F, Blizzard L, Jones G. Smoking interacts with family history with regard to change in knee cartilage volume and cartilage defect development. Arthritis Rheum. 2007;56(5):1521–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The strengthening the reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet. 2007;370(9596):1453–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Zhai G, Blizzard L, Srikanth V, Ding C, Cooley H, Cicuttini F, et al. Correlates of knee pain in older adults: tasmanian older adult cohort study. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;55(2):264–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Dam EB, Lillholm M, Marques J, Nielsen M. Automatic segmentation of high- and low-field knee MRIs using knee image quantification with data from the osteoarthritis initiative. J Med Imaging (Bellingham Wash). 2015;2(2):024001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Cai G, Jiang M, Cicuttini F, Jones G. Association of age, sex and BMI with the rate of change in tibial cartilage volume: a 10.7-year longitudinal cohort study. Arthritis Res Therapy. 2019;21(1):273.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. O’Brien MS, McDougall JJ. Age and frailty as risk factors for the development of osteoarthritis. Mech Ageing Dev. 2019;180:21–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Schlenk EA, Fitzgerald GK, Rogers JC, Kwoh CK, Sereika SM. Promoting physical activity in older adults with knee osteoarthritis and Hypertension: a Randomized Controlled Trial. J Aging Phys Act. 2021;29(2):207–18.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Siviero P, Limongi F, Gesmundo A, Zambon S, Cooper C, Dennison EM, et al. Factors Associated with Functional decline in Hand and Hip/Knee Osteoarthritis after one year: data from a Population-based study. Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2021;73(9):1343–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS. Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1957;16(4):494–502.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Washburn RA, Smith KW, Jette AM, Janney CA. The physical activity scale for the Elderly (PASE): development and evaluation. J Clin Epidemiol. 1993;46(2):153–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Dore DA, Winzenberg TM, Ding C, Otahal P, Pelletier JP, Martel-Pelletier J, et al. The association between objectively measured physical activity and knee structural change using MRI. Ann Rheum Dis. 2013;72(7):1170–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Altman RD, Hochberg M, Murphy WA Jr., Wolfe F, Lequesne M. Atlas of individual radiographic features in osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 1995;3(Suppl A):3–70.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Stuart EA. Matching methods for causal inference: a review and a look forward. Stat Science: Rev J Inst Math Stat. 2010;25(1):1–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Williamson EJ, Forbes A, White IR. Variance reduction in randomised trials by inverse probability weighting using the propensity score. Stat Med. 2014;33(5):721–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. van der Wal WM, Geskus RB. Ipw: an R package for inverse probability weighting. J Stat Softw. 2011;43:1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Cole SR, Hernán MA. Constructing inverse probability weights for marginal structural models. Am J Epidemiol. 2008;168(6):656–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Hollinger JO, Schmitt JM, Hwang K, Soleymani P, Buck D. Impact of nicotine on bone healing. J Biomedical Mater Research: Official J Soc Biomaterials Japanese Soc Biomaterials Australian Soc Biomaterials. 1999;45(4):294–301.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Bazzano LA, He J, Muntner P, Vupputuri S, Whelton PK. Relationship between cigarette Smoking and novel risk factors for Cardiovascular Disease in the United States. Ann Intern Med. 2003;138(11):891–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Bermudez EA, Rifai N, Buring JE, Manson JE, Ridker PM. Relation between markers of systemic vascular inflammation and Smoking in women. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89(9):1117–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Felson DT, Zhang Y, Hannan MT, Naimark A, Weissman B, Aliabadi P, et al. Risk factors for incident radiographic knee osteoarthritis in the elderly: the Framingham Study. Arthritis Rheum. 1997;40(4):728–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Szoeke CEI, Cicuttini FM, Guthrie JR, Clark MS, Dennerstein L. Factors affecting the prevalence of osteoarthritis in healthy middle-aged women: data from the longitudinal Melbourne Women’s midlife Health Project. Bone. 2006;39(5):1149–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Hootman JM, Macera CA, Helmick CG, Blair SN. Influence of physical activity-related joint stress on the risk of self-reported hip/knee osteoarthritis: a new method to quantify physical activity. Prev Med. 2003;36(5):636–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Engström G, Gerhardsson de Verdier M, Rollof J, Nilsson PM, Lohmander LS. C-reactive protein, metabolic syndrome and incidence of severe hip and knee osteoarthritis. A population-based cohort study. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2009;17(2):168–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Toivanen AT, Heliovaara M, Impivaara O, Arokoski JP, Knekt P, Lauren H, et al. Obesity, physically demanding work and traumatic knee injury are major risk factors for knee osteoarthritis–a population-based study with a follow-up of 22 years. Rheumatology (Oxford). 2010;49(2):308–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Mnatzaganian G, Ryan P, Reid CM, Davidson DC, Hiller JE. Smoking and primary total hip or knee replacement due to osteoarthritis in 54,288 elderly men and women. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:262.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Leung YY, Ang LW, Thumboo J, Wang R, Yuan JM, Koh WP. Cigarette Smoking and risk of total knee replacement for severe osteoarthritis among Chinese in Singapore–the Singapore Chinese health study. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2014;22(6):764–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Cicuttini FM, Jones G, Forbes A, Wluka AE. Rate of cartilage loss at two years predicts subsequent total knee arthroplasty: a prospective study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2004;63(9):1124–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Dube CE, Liu SH, Driban JB, McAlindon TE, Eaton CB, Lapane KL. The relationship between Smoking and knee osteoarthritis in the Osteoarthritis Initiative. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2016;24(3):465–72.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Wluka AE, Lombard CB, Cicuttini FM. Tackling obesity in knee osteoarthritis. Nat Rev Rheumatol. 2013;9(4):225–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Albanes D, Jones DY, Micozzi MS, Mattson ME. Associations between Smoking and body weight in the US population: analysis of NHANES II. Am J Public Health. 1987;77(4):439–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Austin PC, Stuart EA. Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Stat Med. 2015;34(28):3661–79.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Mnatzaganian G, Ryan P, Norman PE, Davidson DC, Hiller JE. Smoking, body weight, physical exercise, and risk of lower limb total joint replacement in a population-based cohort of men. Arthritis Rheum. 2011;63(8):2523–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (82103933). The study and image acquisition was funded by the OAI, a public-private.

partnership comprised of five contracts (N01-AR-2-2258; N01-AR-2-2259; N01-AR-2-2260; N01-AR-2-2261; N01-AR-2-2262) funded by the National Institutes of Health, a branch of the Department of Health and Human Services, and conducted by the OAI Study Investigators. Private funding partners include Merck Research Laboratories; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, GlaxoSmithKline and Pfizer, Inc. Private sector funding for the OAI is managed by the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health. This manuscript was prepared using an OAI public use dataset and does not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the OAI investigators, the NIH, or the private funding partners. None of the study sponsors had any role in data collection, storage or analysis, in manuscript writing, or the decision to publish this manuscript.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Ziyuan Shen and Yining Wang are joint first authors

    Graeme Jones and Guoqi Cai are joint senior authors

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Anhui Medical University, Hefei, 230032, Anhui, China

    Ziyuan Shen, Yining Wang, Xing Xing & Guoqi Cai

  2. Menzies Institute for Medical Research, University of Tasmania, Hobart, TAS, 7000, Australia

    Graeme Jones & Guoqi Cai

Authors
  1. Ziyuan Shen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yining Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xing Xing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Graeme Jones
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Guoqi Cai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

GC and GJ contributed to conceptualization, supervision, and review. SZ contributed to the formal analysis and writing—original draft. YW and XX contributed to data acquisition. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guoqi Cai.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethics approvals were obtained from the institutional review board at each of the four clinical centers that recruited OAI participants. The Southern Tasmanian Health and Medical Human Research Ethics Committee approved this study. All participants provided written informed consent.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shen, Z., Wang, Y., Xing, X. et al. Association of smoking with cartilage loss of knee osteoarthritis: data from two longitudinal cohorts. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 24, 812 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06953-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-023-06953-2

Keywords

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

ISSN: 1471-2474

Contact us