Processed and Unprocessed Red Meat and Risk of Colorectal Cancer: Analysis by Tumor Location and Modification by Time.
ABSTRACT: Although the association between red meat consumption and colorectal cancer (CRC) is well established, the association across subsites of the colon and rectum remains uncertain, as does time of consumption in relation to cancer development. As these relationships are key for understanding the pathogenesis of CRC, they were examined in two large cohorts with repeated dietary measures over time, the Nurses' Health Study (n = 87,108 women, 1980-2010) and Health Professionals Follow-up Study (n = 47,389 men, 1986-2010). Cox proportional hazards regression models generated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), which were pooled by random-effects meta-analysis. In combined cohorts, there were 2,731 CRC cases (1,151 proximal colon, 816 distal colon, and 589 rectum). In pooled analyses, processed red meat was positively associated with CRC risk (per 1 serving/day increase: HR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.01-1.32; P for trend 0.03) and particularly with distal colon cancer (per 1 serving/day increase; HR = 1.36; 95% CI: 1.09-1.69; P for trend 0.006). Recent consumption of processed meat (within the past 4 years) was not associated with distal cancer. Unprocessed red meat was inversely associated with risk of distal colon cancer and a weak non-significant positive association between unprocessed red meat and proximal cancer was observed (per 1 serving/day increase: distal HR = 0.75; 95% CI: 0.68-0.82; P for trend <0.001; proximal HR = 1.14, 95% CI: 0.92-1.40; P for trend 0.22). Thus, in these two large cohorts of US health professionals, processed meat intake was positively associated with risk of CRC, particularly distal cancer, with little evidence that higher intake of unprocessed red meat substantially increased risk of CRC. Future studies, particularly those with sufficient sample size to assess associations by subsites across the colon are needed to confirm these findings and elucidate potentially distinct mechanisms underlying the relationship between processed meat and subtypes of unprocessed red meat with CRC.
Project description:Red meat and processed meat have been suggested to increase risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), especially colon cancer. However, it remains unclear whether these associations differ according to meat subtypes or colon subsites. The present study addressed this issue by undertaking a pooled analysis of large population-based cohort studies in Japan: 5 studies comprising 232 403 participants (5694 CRC cases) for analysis based on frequency of meat intake, and 2 studies comprising 123 635 participants (3550 CRC cases) for analysis based on intake quantity. Study-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using the Cox proportional hazards model and then pooled using the random effect model. Comparing the highest vs lowest quartile, beef intake was associated with an increased risk of colon cancer in women (pooled HR 1.20; 95% CI, 1.01-1.44) and distal colon cancer (DCC) risk in men (pooled HR 1.30; 95% CI, 1.05-1.61). Frequent intake of pork was associated with an increased risk of distal colon cancer in women (pooled HR 1.44; 95% CI, 1.10-1.87) for "3 times/wk or more" vs "less than 1 time/wk". Frequent intake of processed red meat was associated with an increased risk of colon cancer in women (pooled HR 1.39; 95% CI, 0.97-2.00; P trend = .04) for "almost every day" vs "less than 1 time/wk". No association was observed for chicken consumption. The present findings support that intake of beef, pork (women only), and processed red meat (women only) might be associated with a higher risk of colon (distal colon) cancer in Japanese.
Project description:Distal and proximal colon tumors have distinct incidence trends and embryonic origins; whether these sub-sites have distinct susceptibilities to known risk factors is unclear. We used pooled data from 407,270 participants in three US-based studies, with overall median follow-up of 13.8 years. We used adjusted Cox models to analyze the association between dietary intakes (from diet history questionnaire) of total, processed and unprocessed red meat; total white meat, poultry and fish and meat-related compounds: heme iron, nitrate, nitrite, the heterocyclic amines (HCAs) and benzo(a)pyrene (B(a)P) and incidence of colorectal cancer subsites. The risk of colorectal cancer (n = 6,640) increased by 35% for each 50 g/1,000 kcal higher daily intake of total red meat, with a significant right-to-left trend from proximal colon (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09-1.39) to distal colon (HR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.13-1.55) and rectum (HR: 1.53; 95% CI: 1.28-1.79). Only unprocessed red meat showed a significant right-to-left trend. Each 50 g/1,000 kcal increase in white meat intake was associated with a 26% reduction in total colorectal cancer risk (HR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.68-0.80), with a significant inverse right-to-left trend. The highest quintile of heme iron was associated with increased cancer risk only in the distal colon (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.02-1.42) and rectum (HR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.07-1.52). The highest quintile of HCAs, and nitrate/nitrite were associated with increased risk of total colorectal cancer, but these associations did not vary across anatomical subsites. In summary, right and left subsites of the colon may have distinct susceptibilities to meat and possibly other dietary risk factors, suggesting that the causes of colorectal cancer may vary across anatomical subsites.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>The relation between consumption of different types of red meats and risk of type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains uncertain.<h4>Objective</h4>We evaluated the association between unprocessed and processed red meat consumption and incident T2D in US adults.<h4>Design</h4>We followed 37,083 men in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986-2006), 79,570 women in the Nurses' Health Study I (1980-2008), and 87,504 women in the Nurses' Health Study II (1991-2005). Diet was assessed by validated food-frequency questionnaires, and data were updated every 4 y. Incident T2D was confirmed by a validated supplementary questionnaire.<h4>Results</h4>During 4,033,322 person-years of follow-up, we documented 13,759 incident T2D cases. After adjustment for age, BMI, and other lifestyle and dietary risk factors, both unprocessed and processed red meat intakes were positively associated with T2D risk in each cohort (all P-trend <0.001). The pooled HRs (95% CIs) for a one serving/d increase in unprocessed, processed, and total red meat consumption were 1.12 (1.08, 1.16), 1.32 (1.25, 1.40), and 1.14 (1.10, 1.18), respectively. The results were confirmed by a meta-analysis (442,101 participants and 28,228 diabetes cases): the RRs (95% CIs) were 1.19 (1.04, 1.37) and 1.51 (1.25, 1.83) for 100 g unprocessed red meat/d and for 50 g processed red meat/d, respectively. We estimated that substitutions of one serving of nuts, low-fat dairy, and whole grains per day for one serving of red meat per day were associated with a 16-35% lower risk of T2D.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Our results suggest that red meat consumption, particularly processed red meat, is associated with an increased risk of T2D.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:Diverticulitis is a common disease with a substantial clinical and economic burden. Besides dietary fibre, the role of other foods in the prevention of diverticulitis is underexplored. DESIGN:We prospectively examined the association between consumption of meat (total red meat, red unprocessed meat, red processed meat, poultry and fish) with risk of incident diverticulitis among 46?461 men enrolled in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986-2012). Cox proportional hazards models were used to compute relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs. RESULTS:During 651?970 person-years of follow-up, we documented 764 cases of incident diverticulitis. Compared with men in the lowest quintile (Q1) of total red meat consumption, men in the highest quintile (Q5) had a multivariable RR of 1.58 (95% CI 1.19 to 2.11; p for trend=0.01). The increase in risk was non-linear, plateauing after six servings per week (p for non-linearity=0.002). The association was stronger for unprocessed red meat (RR for Q5 vs Q1: 1.51; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.03; p for trend=0.03) than for processed red meat (RR for Q5 vs Q1: 1.03; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.35; p for trend=0.26). Higher consumption of poultry or fish was not associated with risk of diverticulitis. However, the substitution of poultry or fish for one serving of unprocessed red meat per day was associated with a decrease in risk of diverticulitis (multivariable RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.99). CONCLUSIONS:Red meat intake, particularly unprocessed red meat, was associated with an increased risk of diverticulitis. The findings provide practical dietary guidance for patients at risk of diverticulitis.
Project description:<h4>Objective</h4>To evaluate the association of changes in red meat consumption with total and cause specific mortality in women and men.<h4>Design</h4>Two prospective cohort studies with repeated measures of diet and lifestyle factors.<h4>Setting</h4>Nurses' Health Study and the Health Professionals Follow-up Study, United States.<h4>Participants</h4>53?553 women and 27?916 men without cardiovascular disease or cancer at baseline.<h4>Main outcome measure</h4>Death confirmed by state vital statistics records, the national death index, or reported by families and the postal system.<h4>Results</h4>14?019 deaths occurred during 1.2 million person years of follow-up. Increases in red meat consumption over eight years were associated with a higher mortality risk in the subsequent eight years among women and men (both P for trend<0.05, P for heterogeneity=0.97). An increase in total red meat consumption of at least half a serving per day was associated with a 10% higher mortality risk (pooled hazard ratio 1.10, 95% confidence interval 1.04 to 1.17). For processed and unprocessed red meat consumption, an increase of at least half a serving per day was associated with a 13% higher mortality risk (1.13, 1.04 to 1.23) and a 9% higher mortality risk (1.09, 1.02 to 1.17), respectively. A decrease in consumption of processed or unprocessed red meat of at least half a serving per day was not associated with mortality risk. The association between increased red meat consumption and mortality risk was consistent across subgroups defined by age, physical activity, dietary quality, smoking status, or alcohol consumption.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Increases in red meat consumption, especially processed meat, were associated with higher overall mortality rates.
Project description:The associations between red and processed meat consumption and the risk of colorectal cancer types have not been conclusively defined. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to analyze these associations. We searched PubMed and EMBASE to identify studies published from inception through September 2016. Dose-response, subgroup and subtype analyses of colorectal cancer (colon cancer, proximal colon cancer, distal colon cancer and rectal cancer) were performed. We ultimately selected 60 eligible studies. Positive associations were observed for colorectal cancer in case-control studies (red meat, P<0.01; processed meat, P<0.01) and cohort studies (red meat, P<0.01; processed meat, P<0.01). However, subtype analyses yielded null results for distal colon cancer in case-control studies (P=0.41) and cohort studies (P=0.18) for red meat and null results for proximal colon cancer in case-control studies (P=0.13) and cohort studies (P=0.39) for processed meat. Additionally, although the results of case-control studies were positive (red meat, P<0.01; processed meat, P=0.04) for rectal cancer, there were no positive associations between red (P=0.34) and processed meat (P=0.06) consumption and the risk in cohort studies. In a systematic review and meta-analysis, we found consumption of red and processed meat was associated with the risk of overall colorectal cancer but not rectal cancer. Additionally, there were no associations between the consumption of red meat and distal colon cancer risk and between the consumption of processed meat and proximal colon cancer risk.
Project description:<h4>Objectives</h4>To study total, processed, and unprocessed red meat in relation to risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) and to estimate the effects of substituting other protein sources for red meat with CHD risk.<h4>Design</h4>Prospective cohort study with repeated measures of diet and lifestyle factors.<h4>Setting</h4>Health Professionals Follow-Up Study cohort, United States, 1986-2016.<h4>Participants</h4>43 272 men without cardiovascular disease or cancer at baseline.<h4>Main outcome measures</h4>The primary outcome was total CHD, comprised of acute non-fatal myocardial infarction or fatal CHD. Cox models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals across categories of red meat consumption. Substitution analyses were conducted by comparing coefficients for red meat and the alternative food in models, including red meat and alternative foods as continuous variables.<h4>Results</h4>During 1 023 872 person years of follow-up, 4456 incident CHD events were documented of which 1860 were fatal. After multivariate adjustment for dietary and non-dietary risk factors, total, unprocessed, and processed red meat intake were each associated with a modestly higher risk of CHD (hazard ratio for one serving per day increment: 1.12 (95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.18) for total red meat, 1.11 (1.02 to 1.21) for unprocessed red meat, and 1.15 (1.06 to 1.25) for processed red meat). Compared with red meat, the intake of one serving per day of combined plant protein sources (nuts, legumes, and soy) was associated with a lower risk of CHD (0.86 (0.80 to 0.93) compared with total red meat, 0.87 (0.79 to 0.95) compared with unprocessed red meat, and 0.83 (0.76 to 0.91) compared with processed red meat). Substitutions of whole grains and dairy products for total red meat and eggs for processed red meat were also associated with lower CHD risk.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Substituting high quality plant foods such as legumes, nuts, or soy for red meat might reduce the risk of CHD. Substituting whole grains and dairy products for total red meat, and eggs for processed red meat, might also reduce this risk.
Project description:We expanded and updated our colon cancer risk model to evaluate colorectal cancer (CRC) and whether subsite-specific risk models are warranted. Using data from 1980-2010 for 90,286 women enrolled in the Nurses' Health Study, we performed competing-risks regression and tests for subsite heterogeneity (proximal colon: n = 821; distal colon: n = 521; rectum: n = 376). Risk factors for CRC were consistent with those in our colon cancer model. Processed meat consumption was associated with a higher risk of distal (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.45; P = 0.02) but not proximal (HR = 0.95; P = 0.72) colon cancer. Smoking was associated with both colon (HR = 1.21) and rectal (HR = 1.27) cancer and was more strongly associated with proximal (HR = 1.31) than with distal (HR = 1.04) colon cancer (P = 0.029). We observed a significant trend of cancer risk for smoking in subsites from the cecum (HR = 1.41) to the proximal colon (excluding the cecum; HR = 1.27) to the distal colon (HR = 1.04; P for trend = 0.040). The C statistics for colorectal (C = 0.607), colon (C = 0.603), and rectal (C = 0.639) cancer were similar, although C was slightly higher for rectal cancer. Despite evidence for site-specific differences for several risk factors, overall our findings support the application of risk prediction models for colon cancer to CRC.
Project description:Processed meat and fish have been shown to be associated with the risk of advanced prostate cancer, but few studies have examined diet after prostate cancer diagnosis and risk of its progression.We examined the association between postdiagnostic consumption of processed and unprocessed red meat, fish, poultry, and eggs and the risk of prostate cancer recurrence or progression.We conducted a prospective study in 1294 men with prostate cancer, without recurrence or progression as of 2004-2005, who were participating in the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor and who were followed for an average of 2 y.We observed 127 events (prostate cancer death or metastases, elevated prostate-specific antigen concentration, or secondary treatment) during 2610 person-years. Intakes of processed and unprocessed red meat, fish, total poultry, and skinless poultry were not associated with prostate cancer recurrence or progression. Greater consumption of eggs and poultry with skin was associated with 2-fold increases in risk in a comparison of extreme quantiles: eggs [hazard ratio (HR): 2.02; 95% CI: 1.10, 3.72; P for trend = 0.05] and poultry with skin (HR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.36, 3.76; P for trend = 0.003). An interaction was observed between prognostic risk at diagnosis and poultry. Men with high prognostic risk and a high poultry intake had a 4-fold increased risk of recurrence or progression compared with men with low/intermediate prognostic risk and a low poultry intake (P for interaction = 0.003).Our results suggest that the postdiagnostic consumption of processed or unprocessed red meat, fish, or skinless poultry is not associated with prostate cancer recurrence or progression, whereas consumption of eggs and poultry with skin may increase the risk.
Project description:<h4>Background</h4>African Americans have the highest incidence of pancreatic cancer of any racial/ethnic group in the United States. There is evidence that consumption of red or processed meat and foods containing saturated fats may increase the risk of pancreatic cancer, but there is limited evidence in African Americans.<h4>Methods</h4>Utilizing the Black Women's Health Study (1995-2018), we prospectively investigated the associations of red and processed meat and saturated fats with incidence of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (<i>n</i> = 168). A food frequency questionnaire was completed by 52,706 participants in 1995 and 2001. Multivariable-adjusted HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression. We observed interactions with age (<i>P</i> <sub>interaction</sub> = 0.01). Thus, results were stratified at age 50 (<50, ≥50).<h4>Results</h4>Based on 148 cases among women aged ≥50 years, total red meat intake was associated with a 65% increased pancreatic cancer risk (HR<sub>Q4 vs. Q1</sub> = 1.65; 95% CI, 0.98-2.78; <i>P</i> <sub>trend</sub> = 0.05), primarily due to unprocessed red meat. There was also a nonsignificant association between total saturated fat and pancreatic cancer (HR<sub>Q4 vs. Q1</sub> = 1.85; 95% CI, 0.92-3.72; <i>P</i> <sub>trend</sub> = 0.08). Red meat and saturated fat intakes were not associated with pancreatic cancer risk in younger women, and there was no association with processed meat in either age group.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Red meat-specifically, unprocessed red meat-and saturated fat intakes were associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer in African-American women aged 50 and older, but not among younger women.<h4>Impact</h4>The accumulating evidence-including now in African-American women-suggests that diet, a modifiable factor, plays a role in the etiology of pancreatic cancer, suggesting opportunities for prevention.