Nut consumption and the risk of oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma in the Golestan Cohort Study
Hashemian M, Murphy G, Etemadi A, Poustchi H, Sharafkhah M, Kamangar F, Pourshams A, Malekshah AF, Khoshnia M, Gharavi A, Hekmatdoost A, Brennan PJ, Boffetta P, Dawsey SM, Abnet CC, Malekzadeh R
British journal of cancer · 14 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
- Food frequency questionnaire
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Government
- World Health Organization
- University or hospital
- Centre International de Recherche sur le Cancer
- Nonprofit
- Cancer Research UK
- University or hospital
- Tehran University of Medical Sciences and Health Services
- Government
- National Cancer Institute
- Grants
- Cancer Research UK (07CN120-B)
Based on 5 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2018-06-25 · Br J Cancer · vol. 119 · issue 2 · pp. 176–181
- Publisher
- Springer Nature
- Cited
- 16 citations · more than 78% of similar papers · 1.3× the field average
- References
- 33 works
- Access
- Open access (hybrid journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Nuts composition and effects · Peanut Plant Research Studies · Oral Health Pathology and Treatment
- Keywords
- Medicine, Hazard ratio, Confounding, Confidence interval, Proportional hazards model, Cohort study, Cohort, Population, Incidence (geometry), Nut, Lower risk, Internal medicine, Environmental health
- MeSH
- humans, nuts, diet, proportional hazards models, risk factors, cohort studies, feeding behavior, aged, middle aged, iran, female, male, esophageal squamous cell carcinoma
16 authors
From US, IR, FR
- Maryam HashemianNational Cancer Institute; Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences; Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics; Tehran University of Medical Sciences
- Gwen A MurphyNational Cancer Institute; Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics
- Arash EtemadiNational Cancer Institute; Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics; Tehran University of Medical Sciences
- Hossein PoustchiTehran University of Medical Sciences
- Maryam SharafkhahTehran University of Medical Sciences
- Farin KamangarTehran University of Medical Sciences; Morgan State University
Abstract
Background
Nut consumption has been inversely associated with gastric cancer incidence in US-based studies, but not with oesophageal cancer. However, there is aetiologic heterogeneity, among oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) cases in low-risk vs. high-risk populations. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between nut consumption and risk of ESCC in a high-risk population.
Methods
The Golestan Cohort Study enroled 50,045 participants in Northeastern Iran, between 2004 and 2008. Intake of peanuts, walnuts and mixed nuts (including seeds) were assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire at baseline. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals for subsequent ESCC adjusted for potential confounders. Non-consumers of nuts were used as the reference category and the consumers were categorised into tertiles.
Results
We accrued 280 incident ESCC cases during 337,983 person-years of follow up. Individuals in the highest tertiles of total nut consumption, and mixed nut consumption were significantly associated with lower risk of developing ESCC compared to non-consumers (HR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.39-0.93, p-trend = 0.02, and HR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.32-0.84, p trend = 0.002, respectively).
Conclusions
We found a statistically significant inverse association between total nut consumption and the risk of ESCC in this high-risk population.
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.