This web page was created programmatically, to learn the article in its authentic location you'll be able to go to the hyperlink bellow: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC13297589/and if you wish to take away this text from our website please contact us [ad_1] Adler (1997) [12] Cohort Study US With Ne: 58; Without Ne: 230 With Ne: 1:57; Without Ne: 11:219 With Ne: 64.0; Without Ne: 61.5 DM ± Incident Ne Alcohol: CAGE rating, historical past of remedy, present use High (4) CAGE alcohol rating considerably related to incident Ne (41.7% vs. 58.3%, p = 0.049; β = 1.94, SE = 0.7281, 6.96 [1.67–28.99], p = 0.008). Braffett (2020) [13] Cohort Study US With DPN: 455; Without DPN: 931 With DPN: 182:273; Without DPN: 475:456 ^ With DPN: 29 (24, 34); Without DPN 26 (21, 32) T1DM ± DPN Occasional or common alcohol use Alcohol consumption not considerably related to DPN (1.14 [0.93–1.41], p > 0.05). Christensen (2020) [14] Cohort Study Denmark Overall: 5249; With DPoN: 938; With DPoN + Pain: 386 Overall: 2205:3144 ^ 65 (57, 72) T2DM ± DPoN ± Pain Alcohol: ≤14 (F)/21 (M) models, >14 (F)/21 (M) models Alcohol consumption above really helpful restrict considerably related to elevated ache prevalence (aPR: 1.31 [1.01–1.69]. Elgendy (2019) [15] Cohort Study Canada 1413 705:708 60 ± 8.4 T2DM ± PN Alcohol frequency: Never, ≤1/mo, 2–4/mo, 2–3/wk, ≥4/wk; Number of drinks/d High alcohol frequency + depressive signs considerably related to prevalent Ne (1.02 [1.00–1.04], p = 0.04). Ellis (2020) [16] Cohort Study US 254 54:200 43.5 ± 8.01 HIV ± DSPoN Lifetime Alcohol Abuse: Yes, No Lifetime alcohol abuse not considerably related to DSPoN (statistics NR). Hawley (1982) [17] Cohort Study US 63 0:63 53.3 (29–69) PN on account of Alcohol History of alcoholism Alcohol abstinence related to important electrophysiology enchancment in PN (+0.12 m/s/abstinent mo, p Hillbom (1984) [18] Cohort Study Sweden 10 0:10 53.1 (38–72) Chronic alcoholism ± PN History of alcoholism and in search of rehabilitation Alcohol abstinence related to enchancment in medical/electrophysiological PN. Iturralde (2024) [19] Cohort Study US Overall: 222,334; AUD+: 1998; AUD−: 220,336 Overall: 106,353:115,978; AUD+: 477:1521; AUD−: 105,876:114,457 AUD+: 57 ± 11.3; AUD−: 64.3 ± 12.7 T2DM ± AUD ± Ne AUD (sure, no) AUD considerably related to the next danger of Ne in unadjusted (p p Kerns (2025) [20] Cohort Study US 1 drink/d: 539; >1 drink/d: 76 0:615 45 (22–79) Testicular most cancers survivors ± worsening PSN, or NP History of alcohol consumption (1 drink/d, >1 drink/d) Alcohol consumption (>1 drink/d) not considerably related to PSN (0.75 [0.40–1.44], p = 0.392), or NP (0.76 [0.29–1.98], p = 0.570). Khan (2023) [21] Cohort Study US TUD: 8009; TAUD: 1672; PSUD: 642; TUD Co: 8009; TAUD Co: 1672; PSUD Co: 642 TUD: 4660:3349; TAUD: 582:1090; PSUD: 233:409; TUD Co: 4665:3344; TAUD Co: 584:1088; PSUD Co: 234:408 TUD: 61.6 ± 12.1; TAUD: 61.52 ± 10.3; PSUD: 57.84 ± 8.3; TUD Co: 61.6 ± 12.1; TAUD Co: 61.42 ± 10; PSUD Co: 57.88 ± 8.1 T2DM + Hypertension ± Ne TUD: Yes, No; TAUD: Yes, No; PSUD: Yes, No PSUD related to considerably increased danger of DN (1.76 [1.33–2.32], p Kindl (2021)[22] Cohort Study Germany With MSK: 255; With CRPS: 223 With MSK: 160:95; With CRPS: 173:50 With MSK: 54.6 (20–80); With CRPS: 50.9 (18–77) CRPS or MSK, on account of trauma Alcohol Consumption: Yes, No, Daily, Weekly, Monthly Prevalence of alcohol consumption important with MSK (58%, p p Kuguyo (2024) [23] Cohort Study Zimbabwe 252 252:0 (26–90); ^ 50 (43–61) Breast most cancers survivors ± sensory loss (cisplatin) History of alcohol consumption Alcohol consumption not considerably related to diminished electrophysiology (p > 0.05). Lehtinen (1993) [24] Cohort Study Finland With ND: 12; Without ND: 101 With ND: 9:3; Without ND: 46:55 With ND: 57.2 ± 4.7; Without ND: 55.4 ± 10.4 DM ± ND Alcohol use (>30 g/wk) Alcohol use not considerably completely different between ND teams (17% vs. 30%, p > 0.05). Sreeram (2023) [25] Cohort Study US Overall: 1034; With CIPN: 704; Without CIPN: 330 Overall: 797:237; With CIPN: 570:134; Without CIPN: 227:103 Overall: 57.1 ± 10.9 (27–79); With CIPN: 55.8 ± 10.8 (27–79); Without CIPN: 59.9 ± 10.4 (27–79) Cancer survivors ± CIPN Alcohol use (Past 4 wks): Yes, No Alcohol use not considerably completely different between CIPN teams, or related to CIPN prevalence (51.2% vs. 46.4%, 1.10 [0.81–1.49], p > 0.05). Xu (2025) [26] Cohort Study China Low-Risk Stable CIPN: 148; Mod-Risk Progressive CIPN: 145; High-Risk Progressive CIPN: 57 350:0 18–44: n = 89; 45–59: n = 179; >60: n = 82 Breast most cancers survivors ± CIPN History of dangerous alcohol consumption (sure, no) History of dangerous alcohol consumption not considerably completely different between CIPN teams (1.4% vs. 2.1% vs. 1.8%, x2 = 0.225, p = 0.894). Agelink (1998) [27] Case–Control Study Germany Ca: 35; Co: 80 Ca: 15:20; Co: 33:47 Ca: 42.9 ± 10 (28–74); Co: 41.8 ± 14.7 (27–77) Alcoholism ± PN & CAN vs. wholesome co Duration of alcohol dependence (yrs), imply TLDA Duration of alcohol dependence was considerably longer (6.1 ± 3.8 vs. 16.2 ± 7.1, p p Doneddu (2020) [28] Case–Control Study Italy Ca: 195; Co: 195 Ca: 109:86; Co: 109:86 NR CIDP on account of any etiology and their companions Alcohol Consumption: Yes, No Alcohol consumption not considerably related to CIDP (0.79 [0.50–1.24], p > 0.05). Fouchard (2023) [29] Case–Control Study France Overall: 323; Ca: 162; Co: 161 Overall: 192:131; Ca: 88:74; Co: 104:57 Ca: 56 ± 16; Co: 69 ± 13 Cutaneous paresthesia ± SFN by way of IENFD on account of any etiology Alcoholism: Yes, No Alcohol consumption not considerably completely different between SFN teams (3.7% vs. 1.2%, p > 0.05). Franklin (1994) [30] Case–Control Study US Ca: 77; Co: 200 Ca: 29:48; Co: 118:82 Ca: 61.7; Co: 58.6 NIDDM ± DSN Alcohol use: by no means, g/wk (20) Alcohol (g/wk: 20) not considerably related to DSN (0.71 [0.29–1.72] p = 0.69, 1.03 [0.40–2.62]). Frost (2013) [31] Case–Control Study Denmark Ca: 324; Co: 832 Ca: 121:203; Co 317:515 Ca Smokers: 49 ± 9.7; Ca Non-Smokers: 44 ± 11.5; Co Smokers: 50 ± 9; Co Non-Smokers: 48 ± 9.9 Ca: Electroneurographically confirmed UN; Co: Without UN Alcohol: u/wk Alcohol consumption not considerably related to UN (0.81 [0.44–1.48]). Gebabo (2021) [32] Case–Control Study Ethiopia Overall: 528; Ca: 264; Co: 264 Ca: 101:163; Co: 105:159 Ca: T1DM or T2DM ± PN Alcohol Consumption (Ever): Yes, No Alcohol consumption considerably increased with PN vs. with out (5.3% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.024). Koike (2001) [33] Case–Control Study Japan 18 0:18 47.7 ± 10.5 (31–70) Alcoholism PoN vs. wholesome co History of heavy alcohol consumption (100 g eth/d for >10 yrs) History of heavy alcohol consumption considerably related to diminished electrophysiology (p Mitchell (1990) [34] Case–Control Study US IDDM: Ca: 54, Co: 56; NIDDM: Ca: 39, Co: 65 IDDM: Ca: 31:23, Co: 35:21; NIDDM: Ca: 25:14, Co: 44:21 IDDM: Ca: 36.1, Co: 32.7; NIDDM: 59.4: 39, Co: 57.7 DM ± Ne Alcohol: median drink-yrs Median alcohol consumption not considerably related to Ne in IDDM (996 vs. 485). or NIDDM (0 vs. 14). Mondelli (2020) [35] Case–Control Study Italy Ca: 220; Co: 460 Ca: 84:136; Co: 242:218 Ca: 51.7 ± 11.8; Co: 47.8 ± 12.4 Ca: UNE; Co: Upper limb complaints Alcohol: u/wk or d Alcohol consumption not considerably completely different between UNE teams (p = 0.463). Pessione (1995) [36] Case–Control Study France Ca: 32; Co: 58 Ca: 6:26; Co: 22:36 Ca: 49 ± 10.1; Co: 46.8 ± 9.6 Alcoholism ± PN Alcohol: parental historical past of alcoholism, alcohol dependence, weekly alcohol consumption (drinks) Alcohol-related danger components all considerably increased in these with PN vs. with out in univariate (p p Richardson (2016) [37] Case–Control Study US Ca: 50; Co: 50 Ca: 18:32; Co: 34:16 Ca: 48.4 ± 12.8; Co: 39.2 ± 12 Ca: UNE+; Co: UNE- Alcohol: Eth/wk (ounces) Eth/wk didn't considerably differ between UNE teams (1.2 ± 1.9 vs. 1.2 ± 2.2, p = 0.993). Walsh (1970) [38] Case–Control Study Australia Ca: 11; Co: 20 1:10 Ca: 58 (41–73); Co: 54 (38–73) PN on account of alcoholism History of PN on account of alcoholism: Yes, No History of heavy alcohol consumption related to diminished electrophysiology (p p Alessi (2020) [39] Cross-Sectional Study US Overall: 934; Never Drinker: 103; Former Drinker: 89; Nonbinge Drinker: 567; Binge Drinker: 174 Overall: 569:365; Never Drinker: 61:42; Former Drinker: 51:38; Nonbinge Drinker: 373:194; Binge Drinker: 84:90 Overall: 38.3 ± 15.8; Never Drinker: 31.8 ± 16.8; Former Drinker: 44.1 ± 16.1; Nonbinge Drinker: 39.8 ± 15.8; Binge Drinker: 34 ± 13 T1DM ± PN Alcohol Consumption: Never, Former, Current (Nonbinge), Current (Binge) Ne considerably decrease in by no means vs. former alcohol consumption (11% vs. 35%, p = 0.006). Ammendola (2000) [40] Cross-Sectional with Nested Case–Control Italy 62 18:44 43.3 (28–69) Chronic alcoholism (>100 g/d for >2 yrs) ± PN Mean alcohol-related illness length; Mean TLDE Diminished electrophysiology considerably related to AUD (p p p Ammendola (2001) [41] Cross-Sectional Study Italy Overall: 76; With Ne: 51; Without Ne: 25 Overall: 21:55; With Ne: 14:37; Without Ne: 7:18 Overall: 24–69; With Ne: 45.3 ± 9.4; Without Ne: 39.1 ± 7.7 Chronic alcoholism ± PN Family historical past of alcoholism (Yes, No); length of alcoholism; TLDE Prolonged alcohol-related illness length (16.2 ± 9.4 vs. 11.1 ± 8.2, p p p Asai (2022) [42] Cross-Sectional Study Japan Overall: 817; With CP: 35; Without CP: 782 Overall: 431:386; With CP: 24:11; Without CP: 407:375 With CP: 63.91 [60.11–67.72]; Without CP: 63.75 [63.02–67.72] Chronic neck/shoulder/higher limb ache on account of any etiology Current drinker: Yes, No Alcohol consumption not considerably completely different between CP teams (42.86% vs. 47.19%, p > 0.05). Beulens (2008) [43] Cross-Sectional Study Europe 1857 893:964 (15–60) T1DM ± Ne Alcohol consumption (g/wk) Moderate alcohol consumption (30–70 g/wk)/frequency (5–7 d/wk) related to considerably decrease danger of Ne (0.61 [0.41–0.91], p p Blackstock (1972) [44] Cross-Sectional Study United Kingdom Chronic Alcoholism: 30; Hospital Personnel: 14 Chronic Alcoholism: 7:23; Hospital Personnel: NR Chronic Alcoholism: 44.8 (21–65); Hospital Personnel: 36.6 ± 6.9 Chronic alcoholism ± PoN vs. hospital personnel Chronic alcohol consumption/dependency Greater electrophysiological perturbation in these with AUD vs. hospital personnel (p Callaghan (2020) [45] Cross-Sectional Study US BMI 35 kg—Ne: 110; BMI > 35 kg + Ne: 28 BMI 35 kg—Ne: 87:23; BMI > 35 kg + Ne: 18:10 BMI 35 kg—Ne: 43.5 ± 11.2; BMI > 35 kg + Ne: 51.4 ± 9.6 Ca: BMI > 35 kg ± Ne; Co: BMI BMI 35 kg—Ne; BMI > 35 kg + Ne Alcohol: drinks/wk (previous yr) Alcohol consumption not considerably completely different between Ne teams (p > 0.05). Chang (2025) [46] Cross-Sectional Study China DPN+: 163; DPN−: 107 DPN+: 69:94; DPN-: 49:58 DPN+: 67 (63–70); DPN−: 65 (62–69) Elderly T2DM ± DPN History of alcohol consumption (sure, no) Alcohol consumption not considerably correlated with DPN (p = 0.310). Chaware (2022) [47] Cross-Sectional Study India 100 0:100 39.91 Chronic alcoholism ± PN Chronic alcoholism (>60 g eth/d or >15 drinks/wk): 15 yrs Greater severity of DPN considerably related to longer consumption (15 yrs: 33.7 ± 3.9; p = 0.001). Ching (2024) [48] Cross-Sectional Study Malaysia Overall: 1283; PN−: 943; PN+: 340 Overall: 635:648; PN−: 495:448; PN+: 140:200 40.6 ± 12.9 (18–80) Any etiology ± PN Alcohol consumption (sure, no) Alcohol consumption not considerably completely different between PN teams (18.53% vs. 19.72%, p > 0.05). Chukwubuzo (2022) [49] Cross-Sectional Study Nigeria 422 289:133 57.6 ± 10.1 T1DM or T2DM ± PN Alcohol Consumption: Yes, No Alcohol consumption not considerably related to painful DPN (1.48 [0.74–2.98], p Claus (1985) [50] Cross-Sectional Study Germany Chronic Alcoholism: 30; Healthy Volunteers: 30 Chronic Alcoholism: 0:30; Healthy Volunteers: 2:28 Chronic Alcoholism: 38.2 ± 6.4 (26–48); Healthy Volunteers: 34.9 ± 6 Chronic alcohol use ± PoN History of alcohol consumption (as much as >400 mL/d for five–12 yrs) Alcohol consumption (>12 yrs) considerably correlated with increased PoN frequency (p = 0.007). Electrophysiology considerably impaired vs. management (p Correa (2023) [51] Cross-Sectional Study Brazil Overall: 444; LLBP: 313; PNBP: 33; WP: 98 Overall: 289:155; LLBP: 188:125; PNBP: 26:7; WP: 75:23 Overall: 39.72 ± 14.68; LLBP: 37.02 ± 13.39; PNBP: 8.45 ± 14.30; WP: 48.78 ± 15.59 Chronic BP on account of any etiology Alcohol Abuse: Yes, No Reported alcohol consumption: LLBP: 12.1%, PNBP: 9.1%, WP: 12.2% (statistics NR). D’Amour (1991) [52] Cross-Sectional Study Canada Chronic Alcoholism: 20; Hospital Personnel: 20 NR Chronic Alcoholism: 46 (31–67); Hospital Personnel: 38 (21–50) Chronic alcoholism ± PN vs. hospital personnel History of alcohol consumption (>10 yrs or >100 g/d) PN in 75% of AUD. Electrophysiology considerably diminished in sufferers with alcoholism vs. wholesome hospital personnel (p Estruch (1993) [53] Cross-Sectional Study Spain Chronic Alcoholism: 250; Healthy Volunteers: 100 Chronic Alcoholism: 0:250; Healthy Volunteers: 0:100 Chronic Alcoholism: 41 ± 11 (20–65); Healthy Volunteers: 40 ± 10 (20–65) Chronic alcoholism ± PN vs. wholesome volunteers Daily ethanol consumption (>100 g) over final 2 yrs PN current in 16% (41) of AUD. AUD + PN had increased ethanol consumption vs. these with out PN (34.7 vs. 22.4, p p Fernandez-Sola (1995) [54] Cross-Sectional Study Spain 100 0:100 41 ± 9 (25–60) Chronic alcoholism ± PN Daily eth consumption (g/d); length of eth consumption; TLDE PN (39% vs. 15%, p = 0.014) and TLDE (31.7 ± 17 vs. 23.3 ± 14, p = 0.01) considerably increased in these with power alcoholism + sort II fiber atrophy vs. with out. Gierthmühlen (2024) [55] Cross-Sectional Study Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, Spain, UK Overall: 1181; Ne + Pain: 843; Ne − Pain: 338 Overall: 405:776; Ne + Pain: 285:558; Ne − Pain: 120:218 Overall: 65.8 ± 12 (19–92); Ne + Pain: 64.9 ± 12.4 (19–92); Ne − Pain: 68.1 ± 10.6 (19–87) Any etiology Ne ± ache Current or earlier alcohol misuse (sure, no) Prevalence of present or earlier alcohol misuse considerably decrease amongst these with ache vs. with out (6.6% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.0022). Gylfadottir (2020) [56] Cross-Sectional Study Denmark 5514 2355:3159 64.1 ± 10.9 T2DM ± DPoN Alcohol: >7 (F)/14 (M) models Alcohol consumption above really helpful restrict not considerably related to DPoN (0.94 [0.74–1.18], p > 0.05), or painful DPoN (1.09 [0.81–1.46], p > 0.05), in multivariable logistic regression. Hicks (2022) [57] Cross-Sectional Study US Overall: 6902; With PN: 1181; Without PN: 5721 Overall: 3589:3313; With PN: 443:738; Without PN: 3101:2620 % (!) 40–49: 36 (0.9); 50–59: 27.8 (0.8); 60–69: 18.2 (0.6); 70–79: 12.8 (0.4); ≥80: 5.2 (0.3) DM ± PN Alcohol: Never, Former, Current Alcohol consumption reported between PN teams: Never: 16.4%, Former: 27.2%, Current: 56.5% vs. 11.8%, 20.9%, 67.3% (statistics NR). Ireri (2024) [58] Cross-Sectional Study Kenya 314 182:132 58.49 ± 17.43 DM ± Ne History of alcohol consumption Alcohol consumption not considerably related to Ne (p = 0.481). Jeyam (2020) [59] Cross-Sectional Study Scotland Overall: 5558; With DPN 715; Without DPN 4842 Overall: 2449:3109; With DPN: 320:395; Without DPN 2129:2713 ^ Overall: 44.7 (33, 55.2); With DPN: 50.6 (41, 59.3); Without DPN: 43.7 (32, 54.4) T1DM ± DPN Alcohol (u/wk): 2–6, 6–14, 14–21, 21–32, >32 Alcohol consumption beneath 32 u/wk related to decrease odds of DPN (0.47 [0.29–0.75], p p > 0.05). Authors counsel reverse causation–protopathic bias. Li (2023) [60] Cross-Sectional Study China Overall: 25,710; With PDPN: 14,699; Without PDPN: 11,011 Overall: 10,785:14,925; With PDPN: 6240:8459; Without PDPN: 4545:6466 ^ Overall: 63 (55, 71); With PDPN: 65 (56, 73); Without PDPN: 61 (53, 69) T2DM ± PDPN Alcohol Abuse: Yes, No PDPN considerably decrease with alcohol abuse vs. with out (54.1% vs. 57.1%, p = 0.002). Authors counsel reverse causation–protopathic bias. Mawdsley & Mayer (1965) [61] Cross-Sectional Study US Chronic Alcoholism: 76; Healthy Personnel: 105 Chronic Alcoholism: 12:64; Healthy Personnel: NR Chronic Alcoholism: 25–69; Healthy Personnel: 20–70 Chronic alcohol use ± PN History of alcohol consumption (1 pint whisky to 1 gallon wine/d) Electrophysiology considerably diminished vs. management (p McCulloch (1980) [62] Cross-Sectional Scotland 541 0:541 44 ± 11.6 (20–59) DM ± PN Alcohol Intake: Moderate (6 drinks/yr to 10 drinks/wk) vs. Excessive (3–4 drinks/d to recognized alcoholism) PN considerably increased in DM males with extreme alcohol consumption vs. these with reasonable (36% vs. 14%, p p Melgaard (1986) [63] Cross-Sectional Study Denmark 468 0:468 45 “Normal” inhabitants ± PoN Alcohol questionnaire together with length and frequency of use Dependence-related behaviors have been considerably correlated with disturbed electrophysiology (p Mellion (2014) [64] Cross-Sectional Study US Overall: 18; Heavy Drinkers: 9; Healthy Co: 9 9:9 Heavy Drinkers: 35.4; Healthy Co: 43.3 Heavy alcohol ingesting (>5 drinks/d (M), >4 drinks/d (F)) + PN vs. wholesome co Eth consumed day by day (g); Average length heavy ingesting Individuals with a historical past of heavy alcohol consumption exhibited diminished electrophysiology, in comparison with these with out (p Mick (2020) [65] Cross-Sectional Study France, Italy, Spain, UK 1030 651:379 60.2 ± 15.32; ^ 61 (49–72) Localized NP on account of any etiology Alcohol Abuse/Dependence: Current, Past, Never Current or previous alcohol dependence/abuse was reported in 6.36% of sufferers with NP (additional statistics NR). Mills (1986) [66] Cross-Sectional Study UK 19 4:15 (30–71) Chronic alcoholism ± PN History of alcoholism (120 g eth/d for 4+ yrs) Chronic alcohol consumption (>100 g/d) considerably related to electrophysiological PN in 12/19 (statistics NR). Monforte (1995) [67] Cross-Sectional Study Spain Alcohol-Dependent: 107; Healthy Reference: 61 Alcohol-Dependent: 18:89; Healthy Reference: 10:51 Alcohol-Dependent: 43 ± 11; Healthy Reference: 41 ± 14 Chronic alcohol use ± PN History of alcohol consumption (>100 g/d (M) or >80 g/d (F) for >2 yrs) Electrophysiological PN recognized in 36.8% of alcohol-dependent people vs. 1 management (1.64%), p p Nagakura (2023) [68] Ecological Cross-Sectional Study Japan Pregabalin Reimbursement Claims per 1000 inhabitants; as much as 126 million NR (40–74) NP on account of any etiology handled with pregabalin Alcohol: Daily, Sometimes, Rarely/Never Excessive alcohol consumption considerably related to prevalent NP (β = 0.2683, p p p Nicolosi (2005) [69] Cross-Sectional Study Italy 40 4:36 49.2 ± 10.3 (33–76) Chronic alcohol use ± SoN History of alcohol consumption (100–400 g/d for five–25 yrs) SoN in 62.5% (25). Electromyography scores have been statistically considerably positively correlated with TLDE (r = 0.35, p Nielsen (2022) [70] Cross-Sectional Study Denmark 2839 High CIPN Score: 274:146; Low CIPN Score: 1193:870 ^^ High CIPN Score: 69; Low CIPN Score: 67; (18–99) Cancer prognosis at any stage of remedy ± CIPN Alcohol: sure/no + u/wk Alcohol consumption considerably completely different between CIPN teams (60.2% vs. 73.5%, p 14 u/wk) considerably related to excessive CIPN20 scores in males (22% vs. 11%, p = 0.002). Papantoniou (2024) [71] Cross-Sectional Study Greece 90 34:56 51.98 ± 8.86 (27–74) AUD ± PN Duration of Abuse; Total Alcohol Units (kg alcohol/lifetime) Alcohol abuse considerably longer in these with Ne vs. with out (8.08 ± 7.25 vs. 6.92 ± 4.38, p = 0.024), and in these with impaired electrophysiology (p = 0.02). Revesz (2022) [72] Cross-Sectional Study The Netherlands Overall: 1516; With PN: 980; Without PN: 536 Overall: 634:882; With PN: 445:535; Without PN: 189:347 Overall: 69.1 ± 9.4; With PN: 70.1 ± 9.4; Without PN: 67.2 ± 9.2 Colorectal most cancers survivors ± PN Alcohol Consumption: Drinks/wk Alcohol consumption considerably decrease in people with PN vs. with out (median 4 vs. 5 drinks/wk, vary 0–100 vs. 0–50, p = 0.006) in univariate evaluation solely. Sahito (2022) [73] Cross-Sectional Study Pakistan Overall: 1057; With PN: 607; Without PN: 450 Overall: 414:643; With PN: 230:377; Without PN: 184:266 30–40: 119; 41–50: 316; 51–60: 324; 61–70: 165; >70 yrs: 133 T2DM ± PN History of alcohol consumption: Yes, No Alcohol consumption reported between PN teams: 4.7% vs. 1.4% (statistics NR). Shetty (2025) [74] Cross-Sectional Study India 110 9:101 41.5 ± 11.9 (22–84) Chronic liver illness ± PN History of alcohol consumption (≥5 yrs) Duration (13.9 ± 6.1 yrs vs. 9.6 ± 4.6 yrs, p Srivastava (2022) [75] Cross-Sectional Study India 98 79:19 51.63 ± 10.68 Cancer survivors ± CIPN History of alcohol consumption: Yes (present, former), No History of alcohol consumption not considerably related to CIPN sensory/motor severity (18.37% vs. 81.63%, p > 0.05). Trendowski (2021) [76] Cross-Sectional Study US With CIPN: 550; Without CIPN: 495 With CIPN: 440:110; Without CIPN: 355:140 ^^ With CIPN: 56 (23–79); Without CIPN: 58 (21–79) African American most cancers survivors ± CIPN Alcohol: sure (earlier 4 wks)/no; Alcohol Consumed (drinks/wk): 0–4, ≥5 Alcohol consumption, drinks/d, not considerably related to CIPN (aPR: 0.88 [0.68–1.14], p = 0.32; aPR: 0.99 [0.91–1.07], p = 0.73). Van der Velde (2020) [77] Cross-Sectional Study The Netherlands Overall: 2401; High Sural SNAPA: 793; Med Sural SNAPA: 796; Low Sural SNAPA: 812 Overall: 1174:1227; High Sural SNAPA: 464:329; Med Sural SNAPA: 377:419; Low Sural SNAPA: 334:478 Overall: 59.3 ± 8.2; High Sural SNAPA: 56.4 ± 8.2; Med Sural SNAPA: 59.4 ± 7.9; Low Sural SNAPA: 62 ± 7.5 T2DM ± PN Alcohol: >7 (F)/14 (M) models Alcohol consumption reported between PN teams: High: 26.7%, Medium: 25.8%, Low: 27.6% (statistics NR). Villalta (1989) [78] Cross-Sectional Study Spain Chronic Alcoholism: 70; Hospital Personnel: 70 Chronic Alcoholism: 0:70; Hospital Personnel: NR Chronic Alcoholism: 39.7 ± 9.6 (20–60); Hospital Personnel: 39.2 ± 11 (20–59) Chronic alcoholism + PN vs. hospital personnel History of alcohol consumption (>100 g/d for >2 yrs) Prevalence of PN in 37% (21/56). Motor CV considerably negatively correlated with TLDE (r = −0.28, p Vittadini (2001) [79] Cross-Sectional Study Italy 296 87:209 45.2 ± 11.2 (20–77) Chronic alcohol use ± PoN History of alcohol consumption (>100 g/d) Prevalence of electrophysiological PoN in 48.6% (144/296). PoN severity elevated as length of alcohol misuse lengthened (19.8% at 5 yrs to 40.4% at 10 yrs, p Wang (2023) [80] Cross-Sectional Study China Overall: 14,908; With DPN: 10,084; Without DPN: 4824 Overall: 6322:8586; With DPN: 4365:5719; Without DPN: 1957:2867 Overall: 61.3 ± 13, ^ 62 (53, 70); With DPN: 62.6 ± 12.5, ^ 63 (55, 71); Without DPN: 58.5 ± 13.5, ^ 59 (50, 67) T2DM ± DPN Alcohol Abuse (Pure Consumption in g/d): >40 (F)/60 (M); Never, Former, Current Alcohol abuse considerably decrease amongst these with DPN vs. with out (8.2% vs. 11%, p Wetterling (1999) [81] Cross-Sectional Study Germany 241 64:177 F: 43.8 ± 8.8; M: 41 ± 9.9 Chronic alcohol use ± PoN History of alcohol consumption: episodic (3 d/wk), steady (day by day) Prevalence of PoN elevated with growing alcohol consumption (11.3%, 29.6%, 29.9%, p = 0.025), and TLDE (p = 0.0104). Wilson & Thompson (2021) [82] Cross-Sectional Study UK Detoxification+: 17; Detoxification−: 13 Detoxification+: 6:11; Detoxification−: 6:7 Detoxification+: 46.8 ± 9 (37–64); Detoxification−: 54.5 ± 10.5 (30–70) High-risk alcohol use ± historical past of cleansing ± NP High-risk alcohol use by way of FAST rating ≥ 3 Prevalence of NP (IDPQ ≥ 3) considerably better in these with historical past of cleansing (8/9) vs. these with out (1/12), p = 0.04. Wu (2025) [83] Cross-Sectional Study US Overall: 1068; MNSI+: 666; MNSI−: 402 641:427 84.1 (78–100) Very outdated adults ± PN Alcohol: Never, Former, Current Current, former alcohol use not related to MNSI-defined neuropathy (0.90 [0.59–1.37], 1.02 [0.67–1.54], respectively). Former use not related to monofilament insensitivity (0.78 [0.52–1.16]), whereas present use was (0.65 [0.43–0.98]). Yokoyama (2020) [84] Cross-Sectional Study Japan Overall: 9914; Without DPoN: 6180; With DPoN: 2745 (with DPoNS: 1689; with UDoPN: 989) Overall: 3715:6139; Without DPoN: 2273:3904; With DPoN: 1041:1705 (with DPoNS: 664:1025, with UDPoN: 397:530) ^^ Overall: 66 (69–73); Without DPoN: 65 (57–71); With DPoN: 70 (63–77) (with DPoNS: 69 (63–76), with UDPoN: 67 (59–75)) T2DM ± DPoN Alcohol: Current, Former, Never Former alcohol consumption related to increased odds of DPN (2.02 [1.25–3.27], p = 0.004), whereas present was not. Authors counsel reverse causation–protopathic bias. Zahr (2019) [85] Cross-Sectional Study US Ca: 154; Co: 99 Ca: 43:111; Co: 41:58 Ca: 49.8 ± 10.5 (21–77); Co: 50.9 ± 13.3 (21–74) Ca: AUD ± PN; Co: wholesome ± PN History of AUD Prevalence of PN (Ca: 20 vs. 134; Co: 3 vs. 96; p = 0.007), vibration notion impairment (Ca: 41 vs. 113; Co: 15 vs. 84; p = 0.03), better with historical past of AUD. Zambelis (2005) [86] Cross-Sectional Study Greece 98 22:17 45.2 ± 9.9 (27–70) Chronic alcohol dependence ± PoN Daily alcohol consumption (g); length of alcohol abuse Duration of alcohol consumption considerably increased in these with PoN vs. with out (19.19 vs. 14.14, p = 0.03). Zambelis (2016) [87] Cross-Sectional Study Greece 99 23:76 47 ± 19.6 Alcohol dependence ± Ulnar Ne Duration of alcohol dependence UNE considerably related to length of alcohol dependence (1.09 [1.04–1.15], p [ad_2] This web page was created programmatically, to learn the article in its authentic location you'll be able to go to the hyperlink bellow: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC13297589/and if you wish to take away this text from our website please contact us