Cargando…
Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature
Animal experiments and human ecological studies suggest that dietary fat intake is associated with a risk of breast cancer, but individual-based studies have given contradictory results. We have carried out a meta-analysis of this association to include all papers published up to July 2003. Case–con...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2003
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2394401/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14583769 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601314 |
_version_ | 1782155407286861824 |
---|---|
author | Boyd, N F Stone, J Vogt, K N Connelly, B S Martin, L J Minkin, S |
author_facet | Boyd, N F Stone, J Vogt, K N Connelly, B S Martin, L J Minkin, S |
author_sort | Boyd, N F |
collection | PubMed |
description | Animal experiments and human ecological studies suggest that dietary fat intake is associated with a risk of breast cancer, but individual-based studies have given contradictory results. We have carried out a meta-analysis of this association to include all papers published up to July 2003. Case–control and cohort studies that examined the association of dietary fat, or fat-containing foods, with risk of breast cancer were identified. A total of 45 risk estimates for total fat intake were obtained. Descriptive data from each study were extracted with an estimate of relative risk and its associated 95% confidence interval (CI), and were analysed using the random effects model of DerSimonian and Laird. The summary relative risk, comparing the highest and lowest levels of intake of total fat, was 1.13 (95% CI: 1.03–1.25). Cohort studies (N=14) had a summary relative risk of 1.11 (95% CI: 0.99–1.25) and case–control studies (N=31) had a relative risk of 1.14 (95% CI 0.99–1.32). Significant summary relative risks were also found for saturated fat (RR, 1.19; 95% CI: 1.06–1.35) and meat intake (RR, 1.17; 95% CI 1.06–1.29). Combined estimates of risk for total and saturated fat intake, and for meat intake, all indicate an association between higher intakes and an increased risk of breast cancer. Case–control and cohort studies gave similar results. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-2394401 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2003 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-23944012009-09-10 Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature Boyd, N F Stone, J Vogt, K N Connelly, B S Martin, L J Minkin, S Br J Cancer Epidemiology Animal experiments and human ecological studies suggest that dietary fat intake is associated with a risk of breast cancer, but individual-based studies have given contradictory results. We have carried out a meta-analysis of this association to include all papers published up to July 2003. Case–control and cohort studies that examined the association of dietary fat, or fat-containing foods, with risk of breast cancer were identified. A total of 45 risk estimates for total fat intake were obtained. Descriptive data from each study were extracted with an estimate of relative risk and its associated 95% confidence interval (CI), and were analysed using the random effects model of DerSimonian and Laird. The summary relative risk, comparing the highest and lowest levels of intake of total fat, was 1.13 (95% CI: 1.03–1.25). Cohort studies (N=14) had a summary relative risk of 1.11 (95% CI: 0.99–1.25) and case–control studies (N=31) had a relative risk of 1.14 (95% CI 0.99–1.32). Significant summary relative risks were also found for saturated fat (RR, 1.19; 95% CI: 1.06–1.35) and meat intake (RR, 1.17; 95% CI 1.06–1.29). Combined estimates of risk for total and saturated fat intake, and for meat intake, all indicate an association between higher intakes and an increased risk of breast cancer. Case–control and cohort studies gave similar results. Nature Publishing Group 2003-11-03 2003-10-28 /pmc/articles/PMC2394401/ /pubmed/14583769 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601314 Text en Copyright © 2003 Cancer Research UK https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Epidemiology Boyd, N F Stone, J Vogt, K N Connelly, B S Martin, L J Minkin, S Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature |
title | Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature |
title_full | Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature |
title_fullStr | Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature |
title_full_unstemmed | Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature |
title_short | Dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature |
title_sort | dietary fat and breast cancer risk revisited: a meta-analysis of the published literature |
topic | Epidemiology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2394401/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14583769 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6601314 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT boydnf dietaryfatandbreastcancerriskrevisitedametaanalysisofthepublishedliterature AT stonej dietaryfatandbreastcancerriskrevisitedametaanalysisofthepublishedliterature AT vogtkn dietaryfatandbreastcancerriskrevisitedametaanalysisofthepublishedliterature AT connellybs dietaryfatandbreastcancerriskrevisitedametaanalysisofthepublishedliterature AT martinlj dietaryfatandbreastcancerriskrevisitedametaanalysisofthepublishedliterature AT minkins dietaryfatandbreastcancerriskrevisitedametaanalysisofthepublishedliterature |