Red and Processed Meat Intake, Polygenic Risk and the Prevalence of Colorectal Neoplasms: Results from a Screening Colonoscopy Population
Fu R, Chen X, Seum T, Hoffmeister M, Brenner H
Nutrients · 4 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
- Cross-sectional study (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Clinical events such as disease or death
- Intake measured by
- Not stated
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
- Government
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
- Government
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
- Nonprofit
- Deutsche Krebshilfe
- Government
- German Research Council (DFG)
- Nonprofit
- German Cancer Aid
- Government
- Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)
- Government
- Federal Ministry of Education and Research
- Grants
- Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BR1704/16-1); Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (70113330); Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (01GL1712); Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (BR1704/16‐1); Deutsche Krebshilfe (01GL1712); Deutsche Krebshilfe (BR1704/16-1); Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (01GL1712); Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (70113330); Deutsche Krebshilfe (70113330)
Based on 7 listed funder(s) and full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2024-08-08 · Nutrients · vol. 16 · issue 16 · p. 2609
- Publisher
- Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute
- Cited
- 5 citations · more than 86% of similar papers · 1.9× the field average
- References
- 26 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Nutritional Studies and Diet · Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
- Keywords
- Colonoscopy, Medicine, Red meat, Polygenic risk score, Population, Colorectal cancer, Internal medicine, Environmental health, Biology, Pathology, Genotype, Genetics, Cancer, Single-nucleotide polymorphism, Gene
- MeSH
- humans, colorectal neoplasms, genetic predisposition to disease, colonoscopy, diet, prevalence, logistic models, odds ratio, risk factors, multifactorial inheritance, meat products, aged, middle aged, female, male, early detection of cancer, red meat
5 authors
From DE, CN
- Ruojin FuGerman Cancer Research Center; Heidelberg University; University Hospital Heidelberg
- Xuechen ChenJinan University; German Cancer Research Center; Heidelberg University
- Teresa SeumGerman Cancer Research Center; Heidelberg University; University Hospital Heidelberg
- Michael HoffmeisterGerman Cancer Research Center; Heidelberg University
- Hermann Brenner · correspondingGerman Cancer Research Center; Heidelberg University
Abstract
High red and processed meat intake and genetic predisposition are risk factors of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, evidence of their independent and joint associations on the risk of colorectal neoplasms is limited. We assessed these associations among 4774 men and women undergoing screening colonoscopy. Polygenic risk scores (PRSs) were calculated based on 140 loci related to CRC. We used multiple logistic regression models to evaluate the associations of red and processed meat intake and PRS with the risk of colorectal neoplasms. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) were translated to genetic risk equivalents (GREs) to compare the strength of the associations with colorectal neoplasm risk of both factors. Compared to ≤1 time/week, processed meat intake >1 time/week was associated with a significantly increased risk of colorectal neoplasm [aOR (95% CI): 1.28 (1.12-1.46)]. This risk increase was equivalent to the risk increase associated with a 19 percentile higher PRS. The association of red meat intake with colorectal neoplasm was weaker and did not reach statistical significance. High processed meat intake and PRS contribute to colorectal neoplasm risk independently. Limiting processed meat intake may offset a substantial proportion of the genetically increased risk of colorectal neoplasms.
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.