Cohort study2013

Polymorphisms in xenobiotic metabolizing genes, intakes of heterocyclic amines and red meat, and postmenopausal breast cancer

Lee HJ, Wu K, Cox DG, Hunter D, Hankinson SE, Willett WC, Sinha R, Cho E

Nutrition and cancer · 13 citations

Review labels

Food frequency questionnaireLumps processed with unprocessed meatNo stated lifestyle adjustment

Neutral facts our review recorded about how this study was done. They describe method, never whether we like the result.

How it was studied

Design
Cohort study (indexed by PubMed)
Studied in
People
Main outcome
Clinical events such as disease or death
Intake measured by
Food frequency questionnaire

Who paid for it

Funding
Independent funding
Government
National Institutes of Health
Government
National Cancer Institute
Government
NCI NIH HHS
Grants
National Cancer Institute (P01 CA087969); National Cancer Institute (CA-87969)

Based on 3 listed funder(s).

Publication

Published
2013-10-07 · Nutr Cancer · vol. 65 · issue 8 · pp. 1122–1131
Publisher
Routledge
Cited
20 citations · more than 86% of similar papers · 2.3× the field average
References
55 works
Access
Open access (repository copy)
Research areas
Effects and risks of endocrine disrupting chemicals · Nutrition, Genetics, and Disease · Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
Keywords
Xenobiotic, Breast cancer, Gene, Heterocyclic amine, Postmenopausal women, Cancer, Medicine, Red meat, Genetics, Internal medicine, Physiology, Biology, Food science, Carcinogen, Biochemistry
MeSH
humans, breast neoplasms, amines, cytochrome p-450 cyp1a2, arylamine n-acetyltransferase, xenobiotics, mutagens, risk factors, case-control studies, follow-up studies, prospective studies, temperature, acetylation, postmenopause, polymorphism, genetic, meat, middle aged, female, hot temperature, cooking, surveys and questionnaires

8 authors

From US, KR, FR

  • Hae‐Jeung LeeBrigham and Women's Hospital; Harvard University; Korea Health Industry Development Institute
  • Kana WuHarvard University
  • David G. CoxInserm; Centre de Recherche en Cancérologie de Lyon
  • David John HunterBrigham and Women's Hospital; Harvard University
  • Susan E. HankinsonBrigham and Women's Hospital; Harvard University
  • Walter Churchill WillettBrigham and Women's Hospital; Harvard University

Abstract

Heterocyclic amines (HCAs) are mutagenic compounds generated when meats are cooked at high temperature and for long duration. The findings from previous studies on the relation between HCAs and breast cancer are inconsistent, possibly because of genetic variations in the enzymes metabolizing HCAs. To evaluate whether the associations of intakes of estimated HCAs, meat-derived mutagenicity (MDM), and red meat with risk of postmenopausal breast cancer were modified by N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2) acetylator genotype or cytochrome P450 1A2-164 A/C (CYP1A2) polymorphism, we conducted a nested case-control study with 579 cases and 981 controls within a prospective cohort, the Nurses' Health Study. HCAs and MDM intakes were derived using a cooking method questionnaire administered in 1996. NAT2acetylator genotype, the CYP1A2 polymorphism, and intakes of HCAs, MDM, and red meat were not associated with risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. There was also no interaction between NAT2 acetylator genotype or CYP1A2 polymorphism and HCAs and MDM and red meat intake in relation to breast cancer. These results do not support the hypothesis that genetic polymorphisms of xenobiotic enzymes involved in the metabolism of HCAs may modify the associations between intakes of red meat or meat-related mutagens and breast cancer risk.

Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.

Community trust

Loading…

How much do you trust this study's findings?

0 · not at all10 · completely

Comments

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Something wrong here?

Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.

Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign in

Educational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.