Meat intake and cancer risk: prospective analyses in UK Biobank
TL;DR: Higher intakes of red and processed meat were associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer, and poultry intake with cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues, require further investigation.
Abstract: Background Red and processed meat has been consistently associated with risk for colorectal cancer, but evidence for other cancer sites is limited and few studies have examined the association between poultry intake and cancer risk. We examined associations between total meat, red meat, processed meat and poultry intake and incidence for 20 common cancer sites. Methods and Findings We analysed data from 475,023 participants (54% women) in UK Biobank. Participants were aged 37-73 years and cancer free at baseline. Information on meat consumption was based on a touchscreen questionnaire completed at baseline covering type and frequency of meat intake. Diet intake was re-measured a minimum of three times in a subsample (15%) using a web-based 24h dietary recall questionnaire. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the association between baseline meat intake and cancer incidence. Trends in risk across baseline meat intake categories were calculated by assigning a mean value to each category using estimates from the re-measured meat intakes. During a mean follow-up of 6.9 years, 28,955 participants were diagnosed with a malignant cancer. Total, red and processed meat intakes were each positively associated with risk of colorectal cancer (e.g. hazard ratio (HR) per 70 g/day higher intake of red and processed meat combined 1.31, 95%-confidence interval (CI) 1.14-1.52). Red meat intake was positively associated with breast cancer (HR per 50 g/day higher intake 1.12, 1.01-1.24) and prostate cancer (1.15, 1.03-1.29). Poultry intake was positively associated with risk for cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues (HR per 30g/day higher intake 1.16, 1.03-1.32). Only the associations with colorectal cancer were robust to Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. Study limitations include unrepresentativeness of the study sample for the UK population, low case numbers for less common cancers and the possibility of residual confounding. Conclusions Higher intakes of red and processed meat were associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer. The observed positive associations of red meat consumption with breast and prostate cancer, and poultry intake with cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues, require further investigation.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: Higher red, processed, and poultry meat consumption was associated with higher risks of several common conditions; higher BMI accounted for a substantial proportion of these increased risks.
Abstract: Background There is limited prospective evidence on the association between meat consumption and many common, non-cancerous health outcomes. We examined associations of meat intake with risk of 25 common conditions (other than cancer). Methods We used data from 474 998 middle-aged men and women recruited into the UK Biobank study between 2006 and 2010 and followed-up until 2017 (mean follow-up of 8.0 years) with available information on meat intake at baseline (collected via touchscreen questionnaire), and linked hospital admissions and mortality data. For a large sub-sample, dietary intakes were re-measured using an online, 24-hour questionnaire. Results In multi-variable adjusted (including body mass index (BMI)) Cox regression models corrected for multiple testing, a higher consumption of red and processed meat combined was associated with higher risks of ischaemic heart disease (HR per 70 g/day higher intake 1.14, 95% CI 1.06-1.22), pneumonia (1.28,1.15-1.41), diverticular disease (1.18,1.10-1.26), colon polyps (1.09,1.04-1.13), and diabetes (1.29,1.19-1.40), and a lower risk of iron deficiency anaemia (IDA), driven by a higher consumption of red meat (HR per 50g/day higher intake 0.77,0.69-0.86). Higher poultry meat intake was associated with higher risks of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (HR per 30g/day higher intake 1.14, 1.06-1.23), gastritis and duodenitis (1.10,1.04-1.16), diverticular disease (1.09,1.04-1.16), and diabetes (1.13,1.06-1.20), and a lower risk of IDA (0.80,0.73-0.87). Conclusions Higher red, processed, and poultry meat consumption was associated with higher risks of several common conditions; higher BMI accounted for a substantial proportion of these increased risks. Higher red and poultry meat consumption was associated with lower IDA risk.
33 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined whether data availability statements are sufficient to capture code availability declarations and examined if this changes on publication based on journal data-sharing policy, and concluded that requiring that authors submit a data availability statement is a good first step, but is insufficient to ensure data availability.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine whether medRxiv data availability statements describe open or closed data-that is, whether the data used in the study is openly available without restriction-and to examine if this changes on publication based on journal data-sharing policy. Additionally, to examine whether data availability statements are sufficient to capture code availability declarations. DESIGN: Observational study, following a pre-registered protocol, of preprints posted on the medRxiv repository between 25th June 2019 and 1st May 2020 and their published counterparts. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Distribution of preprinted data availability statements across nine categories, determined by a prespecified classification system. Change in the percentage of data availability statements describing open data between the preprinted and published versions of the same record, stratified by journal sharing policy. Number of code availability declarations reported in the full-text preprint which were not captured in the corresponding data availability statement. RESULTS: 3938 medRxiv preprints with an applicable data availability statement were included in our sample, of which 911 (23.1%) were categorized as describing open data. 379 (9.6%) preprints were subsequently published, and of these published articles, only 155 contained an applicable data availability statement. Similar to the preprint stage, a minority (59 (38.1%)) of these published data availability statements described open data. Of the 151 records eligible for the comparison between preprinted and published stages, 57 (37.7%) were published in journals which mandated open data sharing. Data availability statements more frequently described open data on publication when the journal mandated data sharing (open at preprint: 33.3%, open at publication: 61.4%) compared to when the journal did not mandate data sharing (open at preprint: 20.2%, open at publication: 22.3%). CONCLUSION: Requiring that authors submit a data availability statement is a good first step, but is insufficient to ensure data availability. Strict editorial policies that mandate data sharing (where appropriate) as a condition of publication appear to be effective in making research data available. We would strongly encourage all journal editors to examine whether their data availability policies are sufficiently stringent and consistently enforced.
13 citations
01 Feb 2023
TL;DR: In this article , the authors analyzed consumption dynamics for various types of meat and processed meats in the Russian Federation from 1985 to 2021 and the role of meat products in nutrition as a source of dietary risk factors for NCDs.
Abstract: Background: Meat is an important source of energy, animal proteins and micronutrients in human nutrition. On the one hand, meat products and dishes are valuable sources of essential nutrients and an integral part of a healthy and nutritious diet; on the other hand, they are among the foods, the excessive consumption of which can pose risks of certain chronic non-communicable diseases (NCDs). The analysis of trends in the average consumption of meat and meat products and their contribution to the chemical composition and energy value of the diet of Russian people is important, inter alia, for substantiating appropriate prevention strategies for NCDs at the population level.
Objective: To analyze current consumption of meat and processed meats, to establish recent trends in their dietary intake, and to assess contribution of meat products to the nutritional value of the diet of Russian people.
Materials and methods: We have analyzed meat and processed meats consumption based on data collected by the Russian Federal Service for State Statistics (Rosstat) within annual selective surveys of household budgets conducted in 1985–2021 and a selective survey of the diets of the Russian population in 2018.
Results: The article presents the results of analyzing consumption dynamics for various types of meat and processed meats in the Russian Federation from 1985 to 2021 and the role of meat products in nutrition as a source of dietary risk factors for NCDs. We have
established that meat and poultry are regularly consumed by 84.7 % of Russian adults while sausages and smoked processed meats are regularly present in the diet of 41.7 % and 18.8 % of them, respectively. We have also estimated the average daily intake of 56.4 g for all types of sausages, 83.3 g for frankfurters and short thick wieners, 133.9 g for semi-finished and ready-to-eat meat products, 59.1 g for meat snacks, and 47.6 g for canned meat and canned meat with vegetables. This regularity, high frequency and volume of consumption indicate that meat products make a considerable contribution to the daily average intake of calories and such critical nutrients posing risks of NCDs as fat, saturated fatty acids, and salt (sodium).
Conclusion: We have observed a significant increase in meat consumption in the Russian Federation in recent years and a change in consumption of various types of meat and processed meats. In order to reduce the exposure of the population to dietary risk factors, it is expedient not only to improve outreach programs in healthy nutrition but also to interact with manufacturers with the purpose of updating regulatory documents for processed meats, developing new low-sodium products, and stimulating voluntary implementation of front-of-pack nutrition labeling.
References
More filters
TL;DR: A simulation of a clinical trial of the treatment of coronary artery disease by allocating 1073 patient records from past cases into two “treatment” groups at random failed to show any significant difference in survival between those patients allocated to the two treatments.
Abstract: Many published papers include large numbers of significance tests. These may be difficult to interpret because if we go on testing long enough we will inevitably find something which is “significant.” We must beware of attaching too much importance to a lone significant result among a mass of non-significant ones. It may be the one in 20 which we expect by chance alone.
Lee et al simulated a clinical trial of the treatment of coronary artery disease by allocating 1073 patient records from past cases into two “treatment” groups at random.1 They then analysed the outcome as if it were a genuine trial of two treatments. The analysis was quite detailed and thorough. As we would expect, it failed to show any significant difference in survival between those patients allocated to the two treatments. Patients were then subdivided by two variables which affect prognosis, the number of diseased coronary vessels and whether the left ventricular contraction pattern was normal or abnormal. A significant difference in survival between the two “treatment” groups was found in those patients with three diseased vessels (the maximum) and abnormal ventricular contraction. As this would be the subset of patients with the worst prognosis, the finding would be easy to account for by saying that the superior “treatment” …
3,450 citations
TL;DR: UK Biobank is not representative of the sampling population; there is evidence of a “healthy volunteer” selection bias; valid assessment of exposure-disease relationships may be widely generalizable and does not require participants to be Representative of the population at large.
Abstract: The UK Biobank cohort is a population-based cohort of 500,000 participants recruited in the United Kingdom (UK) between 2006 and 2010. Approximately 9.2 million individuals aged 40-69 years who lived within 25 miles (40 km) of one of 22 assessment centers in England, Wales, and Scotland were invited to enter the cohort, and 5.5% participated in the baseline assessment. The representativeness of the UK Biobank cohort was investigated by comparing demographic characteristics between nonresponders and responders. Sociodemographic, physical, lifestyle, and health-related characteristics of the cohort were compared with nationally representative data sources. UK Biobank participants were more likely to be older, to be female, and to live in less socioeconomically deprived areas than nonparticipants. Compared with the general population, participants were less likely to be obese, to smoke, and to drink alcohol on a daily basis and had fewer self-reported health conditions. At age 70-74 years, rates of all-cause mortality and total cancer incidence were 46.2% and 11.8% lower, respectively, in men and 55.5% and 18.1% lower, respectively, in women than in the general population of the same age. UK Biobank is not representative of the sampling population; there is evidence of a "healthy volunteer" selection bias. Nonetheless, valid assessment of exposure-disease relationships may be widely generalizable and does not require participants to be representative of the population at large.
1,896 citations
TL;DR: The role of distinct immune cells, cytokines, and other immune mediators in virtually all steps of colon tumorigenesis, including initiation, promotion, progression, and metastasis, are elucidated.
1,727 citations
TL;DR: These assessments of the carcinogenicity of the consumption of red meat and processed meat will be published in volume 114 of the IARC Monographs.
Abstract: In October, 2015, 22 scientists from ten countries met at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France, to evaluate the carcinogenicity of the consumption of red meat and processed meat. These assessments will be published in volume 114 of the IARC Monographs.
1,242 citations