Pre-diagnostic cruciferous vegetables intake and lung cancer survival among Chinese women
Wu QJ, Yang G, Zheng W, Zheng W, Li HL, Gao J, Wang J, Gao YT, Shu XO, Xiang YB
Scientific reports · 13 citations
Review labels
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
- Not stated
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- University or hospital
- Vanderbilt University
- Government
- National Institutes of Health
- Government
- National Cancer Institute
- Government
- Fogarty International Center
- Government
- NCI NIH HHS
- Government
- FIC NIH HHS
- Grants
- National Cancer Institute (UM1 CA182910); National Cancer Institute (R37-CA070867); Fogarty International Center (D43 TW008313); National Institutes of Health (R37CA070867)
Based on 6 listed funder(s).
Publication
- Published
- 2015-05-19 · Sci Rep · vol. 5 · issue 1 · p. 10306
- Publisher
- Nature Portfolio
- Cited
- 16 citations · more than 71% of similar papers · 0.7× the field average
- References
- 36 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Genomics, phytochemicals, and oxidative stress · Nitrogen and Sulfur Effects on Brassica · Cancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
- Keywords
- Cruciferous vegetables, Medicine, Lung cancer, Interquartile range, Hazard ratio, Quartile, Proportional hazards model, Internal medicine, Confounding, Confidence interval, Cancer
- MeSH
- humans, vegetables, lung neoplasms, diet, risk factors, cohort studies, prospective studies, life style, adult, aged, middle aged, china, female, surveys and questionnaires
9 authors
From CN, US
- Qi‐Jun WuRenji Hospital; Shanghai Cancer Institute; State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes; China Medical University
- Gong YangVanderbilt University
- Wei ZhengVanderbilt University
- Honglan LiRenji Hospital; Shanghai Cancer Institute; State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes
- Jing GaoRenji Hospital; Shanghai Cancer Institute; State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes
- Jing WangRenji Hospital; Shanghai Cancer Institute; State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes
Abstract
No study to date has prospectively evaluated the association between pre-diagnostic cruciferous vegetables intake and lung cancer survival among women. This analysis included 547 incident lung cancer cases identified from the Shanghai Women's Health Study (SWHS) during the follow-up period of 1997-2011. Dietary intake was assessed for all SWHS participants at enrollment and reassessed 2-3 years later. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with adjustment for potential confounders. Of the 547 lung cancer patients, 412 patients died during the follow-up. A total of 393 (95.4%) deaths from lung cancer were documented with median survival time of 10.3 months (interquartile range, 3.6-21.1 months). High cruciferous vegetables intake was significantly associated with improved lung cancer-specific survival after adjusting for all nonclinical prognostic factors (n = 547, HR = 0.69; 95%CI = 0.49-0.95; P trend = 0.02) for the highest versus lowest quartile. A slightly stronger association of cruciferous vegetables intake with lung cancer-specific survival was observed in analyses restricted to patients with known clinical prognostic factors (n = 331, HR = 0.63; 95%CI = 0.41-0.97; P trend = 0.03) or never smokers (n = 308, HR = 0.58; 95%CI = 0.37-0.91; P trend = 0.02). In conclusion, pre-diagnostic cruciferous vegetables intake is associated with better survival of lung cancer in Chinese women.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething 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 inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.