Cargando…

An update of the WCRF/AICR systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk

BACKGROUND: In the 2007 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research Second Expert Report, the expert panel judged that there was strong evidence that alcoholic drinks and body fatness increased esophageal cancer risk, whereas fruits and vegetables probably decreased its risk. T...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vingeliene, S., Chan, D. S. M., Vieira, A. R., Polemiti, E., Stevens, C., Abar, L., Navarro Rosenblatt, D., Greenwood, D. C., Norat, T.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834025/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28666313
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx338
_version_ 1783303582191190016
author Vingeliene, S.
Chan, D. S. M.
Vieira, A. R.
Polemiti, E.
Stevens, C.
Abar, L.
Navarro Rosenblatt, D.
Greenwood, D. C.
Norat, T.
author_facet Vingeliene, S.
Chan, D. S. M.
Vieira, A. R.
Polemiti, E.
Stevens, C.
Abar, L.
Navarro Rosenblatt, D.
Greenwood, D. C.
Norat, T.
author_sort Vingeliene, S.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In the 2007 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research Second Expert Report, the expert panel judged that there was strong evidence that alcoholic drinks and body fatness increased esophageal cancer risk, whereas fruits and vegetables probably decreased its risk. The judgments were mainly based on case–control studies. As part of the Continuous Update Project, we updated the scientific evidence accumulated from cohort studies in this topic. METHODS: We updated the Continuous Update Project database up to 10 January 2017 by searching in PubMed and conducted dose–response meta-analyses to estimate summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 57 cohort studies were included in 13 meta-analyses. Esophageal adenocarcinoma risk was inversely related to vegetable intake (RR per 100 g/day: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.80–0.99, n = 3) and directly associated with body mass index (RR per 5 kg/m(2): 1.47, 95% CI: 1.34–1.61, n = 9). For esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, inverse associations were observed with fruit intake (RR for 100 g/day increment: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.75–0.94, n = 3) and body mass index (RR for 5 kg/m(2) increment: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.56–0.73, n = 8), and direct associations with intakes of processed meats (RR for 50 g/day increment: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.11–2.28, n = 3), processed and red meats (RR for 100 g/day increment: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.04–1.82, n = 3) and alcohol (RR for 10 g/day increment: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.12–1.41, n = 6). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from cohort studies suggested a protective role of vegetables and body weight control in esophageal adenocarcinomas development. For squamous cell carcinomas, higher intakes of red and processed meats and alcohol may increase the risk, whereas fruits intake may play a protective role.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5834025
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58340252018-10-01 An update of the WCRF/AICR systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk Vingeliene, S. Chan, D. S. M. Vieira, A. R. Polemiti, E. Stevens, C. Abar, L. Navarro Rosenblatt, D. Greenwood, D. C. Norat, T. Ann Oncol Reviews BACKGROUND: In the 2007 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research Second Expert Report, the expert panel judged that there was strong evidence that alcoholic drinks and body fatness increased esophageal cancer risk, whereas fruits and vegetables probably decreased its risk. The judgments were mainly based on case–control studies. As part of the Continuous Update Project, we updated the scientific evidence accumulated from cohort studies in this topic. METHODS: We updated the Continuous Update Project database up to 10 January 2017 by searching in PubMed and conducted dose–response meta-analyses to estimate summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 57 cohort studies were included in 13 meta-analyses. Esophageal adenocarcinoma risk was inversely related to vegetable intake (RR per 100 g/day: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.80–0.99, n = 3) and directly associated with body mass index (RR per 5 kg/m(2): 1.47, 95% CI: 1.34–1.61, n = 9). For esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, inverse associations were observed with fruit intake (RR for 100 g/day increment: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.75–0.94, n = 3) and body mass index (RR for 5 kg/m(2) increment: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.56–0.73, n = 8), and direct associations with intakes of processed meats (RR for 50 g/day increment: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.11–2.28, n = 3), processed and red meats (RR for 100 g/day increment: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.04–1.82, n = 3) and alcohol (RR for 10 g/day increment: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.12–1.41, n = 6). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from cohort studies suggested a protective role of vegetables and body weight control in esophageal adenocarcinomas development. For squamous cell carcinomas, higher intakes of red and processed meats and alcohol may increase the risk, whereas fruits intake may play a protective role. Oxford University Press 2017-10 2017-06-29 /pmc/articles/PMC5834025/ /pubmed/28666313 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx338 Text en © The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
spellingShingle Reviews
Vingeliene, S.
Chan, D. S. M.
Vieira, A. R.
Polemiti, E.
Stevens, C.
Abar, L.
Navarro Rosenblatt, D.
Greenwood, D. C.
Norat, T.
An update of the WCRF/AICR systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk
title An update of the WCRF/AICR systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk
title_full An update of the WCRF/AICR systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk
title_fullStr An update of the WCRF/AICR systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk
title_full_unstemmed An update of the WCRF/AICR systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk
title_short An update of the WCRF/AICR systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk
title_sort update of the wcrf/aicr systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk
topic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5834025/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28666313
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdx338
work_keys_str_mv AT vingelienes anupdateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT chandsm anupdateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT vieiraar anupdateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT polemitie anupdateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT stevensc anupdateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT abarl anupdateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT navarrorosenblattd anupdateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT greenwooddc anupdateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT noratt anupdateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT vingelienes updateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT chandsm updateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT vieiraar updateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT polemitie updateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT stevensc updateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT abarl updateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT navarrorosenblattd updateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT greenwooddc updateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk
AT noratt updateofthewcrfaicrsystematicliteraturereviewandmetaanalysisondietaryandanthropometricfactorsandesophagealcancerrisk