Very hot tea and coffee have been linked to a threefold increased risk of one type of oesophageal cancer

People who prefer their tea, coffee and other hot drinks ‘very hot’ were more likely to develop squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus than those who drank them warm. In an analysis of nearly a million adults in the UK, the relative risk for this group was found to be approximately three times higher.

This does not mean that tea or coffee in themselves cause cancer. The study links the increased risk primarily to the temperature of the drink and remains observational: it shows a consistent association but does not prove a cause-and-effect relationship.

Details

A team from the University of Oxford, led by epidemiologist Keren Papier, combined data from 977,282 participants in two large UK studies — the UK Biobank and the Million Women Study. The average follow-up period was 11.1 years in the UK Biobank and 14.2 years in the Million Women Study.

During this period, the researchers recorded 2,348 new cases of oesophageal cancer: 1,045 cases of squamous cell carcinoma and 1,303 cases of adenocarcinoma. Among those who described their usual drink temperature as ‘very hot’, the relative risk of squamous cell carcinoma was 3.17 times higher than among participants who preferred ‘warm’ drinks. No such association was found for adenocarcinoma.

Frequency was also a factor. After adjusting for temperature preferences, consuming six or more hot drinks a day was associated with a 71 per cent increase in the relative risk of squamous cell carcinoma compared with consuming fewer.

However, the researchers did not measure the temperature of the tea or coffee with a thermometer. Participants chose their own category — ‘warm’, ‘hot’ or ‘very hot’. Therefore, the 65 °C threshold mentioned in the guidelines cannot be considered an exact threshold established specifically by this study. The International Agency for Research on Cancer had previously classified the consumption of beverages at temperatures above 65 °C as a probable carcinogen, but the new study assessed subjective preferences rather than temperature readings.

The authors also calculated that, in the British population, around 14 per cent of squamous cell oesophageal cancer cases could theoretically be prevented if people who prefer their drinks ‘very hot’ switched to a temperature more typical of the ‘hot’ category. This is a population-level estimate, not the result of a specific prevention trial.

Why this is important

One possible explanation for the link is repeated thermal damage to the oesophageal mucosa. Very hot liquids can irritate and damage cells, and the constant repair of tissue could, in theory, increase the likelihood of adverse changes. However, the mechanism itself was not directly tested in this study.

There are other limitations as well. Temperature was estimated based on participants’ reports, and people who can tolerate very hot drinks without difficulty may differ from others in terms of mucosal sensitivity or other characteristics. Therefore, the result cannot be reduced to the formula ‘very hot tea causes cancer’.

In absolute terms, this type of cancer remains relatively rare: according to Cancer Research UK, the lifetime risk of squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus in the UK is around 1 per cent. Even a significant increase in relative risk does not mean that the disease is likely to affect the majority of people.

The practical conclusion is simpler: there is no need to give up tea or coffee because of this study. If a drink is so hot that it is uncomfortable to drink, it is sensible to let it cool down a little. That said, smoking and alcohol consumption remain more significant and well-established risk factors for squamous cell carcinoma of the oesophagus.

Source

Keren Papier, Kezia Gaitskell, Sarah Floud, Grace K. Reeves. Hot Drinks and Oesophageal Cancer: Prospective Analyses in Around 1 Million UK Adults. International Journal of Cancer, 2026. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.70654.

Cancer Research UK: analysis of the study’s findings and limitations.

MedicalXpress: original article.