Associations between unprocessed red and processed meat, poultry, seafood and egg intake and the risk of prostate cancer: A pooled analysis of 15 prospective cohort studies
Wu K, Spiegelman D, Hou T, Albanes D, Allen NE, Berndt SI, van den Brandt PA, Giles GG, Giovannucci E, Alexandra Goldbohm R, Goodman GG, Goodman PJ, Håkansson N, Inoue M, Key TJ, Kolonel LN, Männistö S, McCullough ML, Neuhouser ML, Park Y, Platz EA, Schenk JM, Sinha R, Stampfer MJ, Stevens VL, Tsugane S, Visvanathan K, Wilkens LR, Wolk A, Ziegler RG, Smith-Warner SA
International journal of cancer · 51 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
- Nonprofit
- World Cancer Research Fund International
- Nonprofit
- Cancer Research UK
- Government
- National Institutes of Health
- Nonprofit
- World Cancer Research Fund
- Government
- National Cancer Institute
- Government
- NCI NIH HHS
- Grants
- National Cancer Institute (UM1-CA167462); National Cancer Institute (P01 CA055075.); National Cancer Institute (P01 CA 55075); National Cancer Institute (U01 CA063673); National Cancer Institute (UM1 CA182883); National Cancer Institute (UM1-CA-167552); National Cancer Institute (P30CA071789); National Cancer Institute (CA-55075); National Institutes of Health (2009/89); Cancer Research UK (19170); World Cancer Research Fund International (2009/89); National Cancer Institute (UG1 CA189974); Cancer Research UK (16491); National Cancer Institute (U10 CA037429); World Cancer Research Fund International (CA55075); National Cancer Institute (2009/89); World Cancer Research Fund (2009/89); National Institutes of Health (P01 CA 55075); National Institutes of Health (CA55075)
Based on 6 listed funder(s).
Publication
- Published
- 2015-12-19 · Int J Cancer · vol. 138 · issue 10 · pp. 2368–2382
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Cited
- 80 citations · more than 98% of similar papers · 9.6× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 69 works
- Access
- Free to read
- Research areas
- Nutritional Studies and Diet · Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling · Fatty Acid Research and Health
- Keywords
- Prostate cancer, Medicine, Red meat, Hazard ratio, Confidence interval, Relative risk, Proportional hazards model, Cancer, Prospective cohort study, Cohort, Cohort study, Prostate, Internal medicine, Gynecology, Pathology
- MeSH
- humans, prostatic neoplasms, diet, incidence, odds ratio, risk, cohort studies, prospective studies, eggs, meat, seafood, male
31 authors
From US, GB, NL, AU, SE, FI
- Kana Wu · correspondingHarvard University
- Donna L. SpiegelmanHarvard University
- Tao HouHarvard University
- Demetrius AlbanesUnited States Department of Health and Human Services; National Cancer Institute; Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics
- Naomi E. AllenUniversity of Oxford
- Sonja I. BerndtUnited States Department of Health and Human Services; National Cancer Institute; Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics
Abstract
Reports relating meat intake to prostate cancer risk are inconsistent. Associations between these dietary factors and prostate cancer were examined in a consortium of 15 cohort studies. During follow-up, 52,683 incident prostate cancer cases, including 4,924 advanced cases, were identified among 842,149 men. Cox proportional hazard models were used to calculate study-specific relative risks (RR) and then pooled using random effects models. Results do not support a substantial effect of total red, unprocessed red and processed meat for all prostate cancer outcomes, except for a modest positive association for tumors identified as advanced stage at diagnosis (advanced(r)). For seafood, no substantial effect was observed for prostate cancer regardless of stage or grade. Poultry intake was inversely associated with risk of advanced and fatal cancers (pooled multivariable RR [MVRR], 95% confidence interval, comparing ≥ 45 vs. <5 g/day: advanced 0.83, 0.70-0.99; trend test p value 0.29), fatal, 0.69, 0.59-0.82, trend test p value 0.16). Participants who ate ≥ 25 versus <5 g/day of eggs (1 egg ∼ 50 g) had a significant 14% increased risk of advanced and fatal cancers (advanced 1.14, 1.01-1.28, trend test p value 0.01; fatal 1.14, 1.00-1.30, trend test p value 0.01). When associations were analyzed separately by geographical region (North America vs. other continents), positive associations between unprocessed red meat and egg intake, and inverse associations between poultry intake and advanced, advanced(r) and fatal cancers were limited to North American studies. However, differences were only statistically significant for eggs. Observed differences in associations by geographical region warrant further investigation.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher.
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.