Food groups and risk of colorectal cancer
Schwingshackl L, Schwedhelm C, Hoffmann G, Knüppel S, Laure Preterre A, Iqbal K, Bechthold A, De Henauw S, Michels N, Devleesschauwer B, Boeing H, Schlesinger S
International journal of cancer · 239 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
- Meta-analysis (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
- Funding not disclosed
Publication
- Published
- 2017-12-06 · Int J Cancer · vol. 142 · issue 9 · pp. 1748–1758
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Cited
- 348 citations · more than 100% of similar papers · 21.6× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 48 works
- Access
- Free to read
- Research areas
- Nutritional Studies and Diet · Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling · Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
- Keywords
- Red meat, Medicine, Colorectal cancer, Refined grains, Confidence interval, Relative risk, Meta-analysis, Food group, Food science, Whole grains, Fish <Actinopterygii>, Cancer, Internal medicine, Environmental health, Biology, Pathology
- MeSH
- humans, colorectal neoplasms, diet, case-control studies, cohort studies
12 authors
From DE, AT, BE
- Lukas Schwingshackl · correspondingGerman Institute of Human Nutrition
- Carolina SchwedhelmGerman Institute of Human Nutrition
- Georg E. HOFFMANNUniversity of Vienna
- Sven KnüppelGerman Institute of Human Nutrition
- Anne Laure PreterreGerman Institute of Human Nutrition
- Khalid Javed IqbalGerman Institute of Human Nutrition
Abstract
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarize the evidence on the relationship between intake of 12 major food groups, including whole grains, refined grains, vegetables, fruit, nuts, legumes, eggs, dairy, fish, red meat, processed meat and sugar-sweetened beverages with risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). We conducted a systematic search in PubMed and Embase for prospective studies investigating the association between these 12 food groups and risk of CRC until April 2017. Summary risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a random effects model for high vs. low intake categories, as well as for linear and nonlinear relationships. An inverse association was observed for whole grains (RR30g/d : 0.95, 95% CI 0.93, 0.97; n = 9 studies), vegetables (RR100g/d : 0.97, 95% CI 0.96, 0.98; n = 15), fruit (RR100g/d : 0.97, 95% CI 0.95, 0.99; n = 16) and dairy (RR200g/d : 0.93, 95% CI 0.91, 0.94; n = 15), while a positive association for red meat (RR100g/d : 1.12, 95% CI 1.06, 1.19; n = 21) and processed meat (RR50g/d : 1.17, 95% CI 1.10, 1.23; n = 16), was seen in the linear dose-response meta-analysis. Some evidence for nonlinear relationships was observed between vegetables, fruit and dairy and risk of colorectal cancer. Findings of this meta-analysis showed that a diet characterized by high intake of whole grains, vegetables, fruit and dairy products and low amounts of red meat and processed meat was associated with lower risk of CRC.
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.