SummaryBackground Alcohol consumption increases cancer risk and is responsible for substantial cancer incidence and mortality. Alcohol policies have the potential to reduce cancer burden but remain under-implemented. Several Canadian jurisdictions are considering minimum unit pricing (MUP) and alcohol warning label (AWL) strategies. We aimed to assess the effect of these policies on cancer incidence and mortality in Canada. Methods We estimated baseline counts of alcohol-attributable cancer incident cases and mortalities in Canada, 2022, and modelled the effect of five alcohol policy scenarios comprised of MUP and AWLs. We used cancer registry and mortality data, representative alcohol use surveys, and product-level alcohol sales data. We used the International Model of Alcohol Harms and Policies to estimate alcohol-attributable burden at baseline and in each scenario. Scenarios tested were cancer warning labels (scenario 1) ; multi-message rotating labels, which consisted of a cancer warning label, a standard drink label, and a low-risk drinking guidelines label on a rotating basis (scenario 2) ; an MUP at CA1·75 per standard drink (scenario 3) ; an MUP at 2·00 (scenario 4) ; and a combined scenario with a 2·00 at MUP and a cancer warning label (scenario 5). Findings Alcohol caused an estimated 9498 (95% uncertainty estimate 8950–10 049) cancer cases and 3866 (3624–4106) cancer deaths in Canada in 2022. All policy scenarios were estimated to reduce alcohol use and cancer burden, with stronger effects from more stringent interventions. For example, a 2·00 MUP with cancer labels was projected to reduce the number of incident cases of alcohol-attributable cancer by 674 (484–911; 7·1% 5·1–9·6) and deaths by 216 (155–292; 5·6% 4·0–7·5) when effects were fully realised. The largest proportional benefits were seen among lower-income populations and younger age groups. Interpretation Alcohol policies, particularly those combining pricing and labelling, could substantially reduce the cancer burden and health inequalities. Funding Canadian Institutes of Health Research.
Sherk et al. (Tue,) studied this question.