31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Nutrition, lifestyle and colorectal cancer incidence: a prospective investigation of 10 998 vegetarians and non-vegetarians in the United Kingdom

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In Europe and most of the industrialised world, colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer in men after lung and prostate cancer and the second most common in women after breast cancer (Parkin, 2001). A genetic component of risk is well established (Cannon-Albright et al, 1988), but diet is widely thought to be the most important determinant of risk. Two major reports reviewed the association between meat consumption and colorectal cancer risk and agreed that the findings were inconsistent, but suggestive of a positive association (World Cancer Research Fund, 1997; COMA, 1998). Evidence that risk is reduced by a relatively high intake of fruit and vegetables, and/or dietary fibre, is suggestive but not conclusive (Fuchs et al., 1999; Michels et al., 2000; Terry et al, 2001; Bingham et al, 2003). We aimed to examine the relationship of lifestyle and dietary factors with the incidence of colorectal cancer in a cohort that included a large proportion of vegetarians. In particular, we sought to examine whether the risk for colorectal cancer is lower in vegetarians than in meat-eaters, and low in participants who reported consuming relatively large amounts of fruit or vegetables and other foods high in fibre. SUBJECTS AND METHODS The Oxford Vegetarian Study (Appleby et al, 1999) is a prospective investigation of 11 140 vegetarians and nonvegetarians who were recruited in the United Kingdom between 1980 and 1984. Participants were contacted through the Vegetarian Society of the United Kingdom, publicity in the national and local media, and word of mouth via participants already recruited. Non-vegetarian participants were recruited by the vegetarian participants, who were asked to nominate friends and relatives who ate meat, fish, or both. Upon entry in to the study, participants completed a questionnaire including a simple food frequency questionnaire. Questions on other lifestyle factors related to health (smoking, alcohol consumption, and amount of exercise), date of birth, occupation, height and weight, and medical history (including illnesses related to the risk of cardiovascular disease and, for women, reproductive history) were also included. The validity of the questionnaire has been examined for estimating dietary fibre intake, but not for other nutrients (Gear et al, 1979). Participants were categorised into tertiles of the distribution of intake of total fat from animal foods (meat, eggs, milk, and cheese), as well as for dietary fibre derived from cereals, fruit, and vegetables. Participants were classified as vegetarians (including lacto-ovo-vegetarians and vegans) or nonvegetarians (meat eaters and people who ate fish but not meat), using their answers to questions on the consumption of meat, fish, dairy products, and eggs. Each participant was flagged at the UK National Health Service central register and participants were followed for information on cancer registration and death. Participants were included in this analysis if they were aged 16–89 years at entry, had not been diagnosed with a malignant cancer before recruitment (except for nonmelanoma skin cancer, ICD9 code 173), and could be classified according to their smoking status and alcohol consumption. Participants were followed up to 31 December 1999, subject to censoring at age 90. Cox's proportional hazards model was used to estimate the association between selected nutritional and lifestyle factors and the risk of colorectal cancer. All incidence rate ratios were adjusted for age at recruitment (in 11 categories: <40, 40–44, 85–89 years) and sex. Further adjustments were made for smoking status (in three categories: never, former, and current smoker) and alcohol consumption (in three categories: non-/occasional drinker, 1–7 u week−1 and >7 u week−1). The statistical analysis was performed using the STATA statistical package (StatCorp. 2001). RESULTS A total of 10 998 participants were included in the analysis with an average follow-up of 17 years. There were 95 incident colorectal cancer cases, 39 in vegetarians and 56 in nonvegetarians. Table 1 Table 1 Baseline characteristics of the participants by sex, given as number (percentage) of participants except where indicated Characteristic Men (n=4162) Women (n=6836) Total (n=10998) Median age at entry (years) 34 33 33   Smoking  Never smoker 1816 (43.6) 4103 (60.0) 5919 (53.8)  Former smoker 1317 (31.7) 1618 (23.7) 2935 (26.7)  Current smoker 1029 (24.7) 1115 (16.3) 2144 (19.5)   Alcohol  <1 unit/week 948 (22.8) 2223 (32.5) 3171 (28.8)  1–7 units/week 1194 (28.7) 3101 (45.4) 4295 (39.1)  >7 units/week 2020 (48.5) 1512 (22.1) 3532 (32.1)   Body mass index a (kg m −2 )  <20 594 (14.4) 1781 (26.6) 2375 (22.0)  20–<22.5 1567 (38.1) 2806 (41.9) 4373 (40.4)  22.5–<25 1261 (30.6) 1407 (21.0) 2668 (25.0)  25+ 693 (16.8) 706 (10.5) 1399 (13.0)  Median 22.4 21.4 21.7   Diet group  Non–vegetarians 2565 (61.6) 3780 (55.3) 6345 (57.7)  Vegetarians 1597 (38.4) 3056 (44.7) 4653 (42.3)   Median dietary fibre intake b (g day −1 )  Bottom third 17.9 16.5 17.0  Middle third 27.3 24.7 25.7  Top third 39.6 35.0 36.7   Median animal fat intake c (g day −1 )  Bottom third 25.5 23.6 24.8  Middle third 52.4 45.2 47.2  Top third 74.7 67.0 70.6   a Body mass index is unknown for 183 participants. b Dietary fibre intake (Southgate fibre) is unknown for 3052 participants. c Animal fat intake is unknown for 1470 participants. shows the baseline characteristics of the participants. Median age at entry was 34 years for men and 33 for women. In all, 38% of men and 45% of women were vegetarians. The Standardized Incidence Ratio (SIR) for colorectal cancer compared to the general population of England and Wales was 0.91 (95% CI: 0.74–1.12). The SIRs for vegetarians and non-vegetarians were 0.81 (95% CI: 0.58–1.11) and 1.00 (95% CI: 0.76–1.30), respectively. Table 2 Table 2 Relative risks (95% CI) for colorectal cancer associated with selected dietary and lifestyle factors Factor Category Casesa Relative riskb P c Relative riskd P c Sex Male 37 1.00   1.00     Female 58 0.85 (0.56–1.29) 0.452 1.02 (0.66–1.56) 0.941   Diet group Non-vegetarians 56 1.00   1.00     Vegetarians 39 0.72 (0.48–1.10) 0.132 0.85 (0.55–1.32) 0.463   Meat Not eaten 48 1.00   1.00     Eaten less than daily 21 1.35 (0.80–2.27)   1.19 (0.70–2.02)     Eaten daily 24 1.34 (0.81–2.23) 0.209 1.14 (0.67–1.93) 0.581   Fish Not eaten 40 1.00   1.00     Less than once/week 23 1.41 (0.84–2.37)   1.21 (0.71–2.06)     Once or more/week 32 1.38 (0.86–2.22) 0.168 1.17 (0.71–1.92) 0.530   Eggs <1 eggs week−1 15 1.00   1.00     1–5 eggs week−1 58 1.32 (0.75–2.33)   1.24 (0.70–2.20)     6+ eggs week−1 21 1.43 (0.73–2.78) 0.301 1.29 (0.66–2.52) 0.428   Milk <0.5 pints day−1 31 1.00   1.00     0.5 pints day−1 36 0.88 (0.54–1.42)   0.86 (0.53–1.40)     >0.5 pints day−1 26 1.08 (0.64–1.84) 0.809 1.10 (0.65–1.87) 0.779   Cheese <5 times week−1 41 1.00   1.00     5 to 9 times week−1 42 1.26 (0.82–1.94)   1.26 (0.82–1.94)     10+ times week−1 9 1.02 (0.49–2.10) 0.580 0.98 (0.48–2.03) 0.631   Fresh or dried fruit <5 times week−1 31 1.00   1.00     5 to 9 times week−1 33 0.58 (0.35–0.95)   0.59 (0.36–0.98)     10+ times week−1 27 0.57 (0.34–0.97) 0.041 0.60 (0.35–1.02) 0.067   Total vegetables Lowest third 46 1.00   1.00     Middle third 19 0.52 (0.30–0.89)   0.53 (0.31–0.90)     Highest third 30 0.85 (0.53–1.34) 0.357 0.86 (0.54–1.38) 0.415   Brown bread <15 slices week−1 45 1.00   1.00     15+ slices week−1 44 0.86 (0.56–1.31) 0.482 0.90 (0.59–1.38) 0.638   White bread <15 slices week−1 43 1.00   1.00     15+ slices week−1 16 2.25 (1.25–4.04) 0.006 2.11 (1.17–3.81) 0.009   Breakfast cereals Not eaten 25 1.00   1.00     <5 times week−1 15 1.08 (0.57–2.05)   1.12 (0.59–2.13)     5+ times week−1 47 1.14 (0.70–1.85) 0.606 1.24 (0.76–2.03) 0.389   Total dietary fibre Lowest third 20 1.00   1.00     Middle third 24 1.03 (0.57–1.87)   1.07 (0.59–1.95)     Highest third 19 0.73 (0.39–1.37) 0.300 0.82 (0.43–1.56) 0.424   Total animal fat Lowest third 23 1.00   1.00     Middle third 33 1.65 (0.97–2.81)   1.55 (0.91–2.66)     Highest third 20 1.16 (0.64–2.13) 0.528 1.07 (0.58–1.97) 0.660   Vitamin supplements Not used 65 1.00   1.00     Used 26 1.02 (0.65–1.62) 0.925 1.00 (0.63–1.59) 0.993   Smoking Never smoker 36 1.00   1.00     Former smoker 43 1.95 (1.24–3.07)   1.80 (1.13–2.85)     Current smoker 16 1.88 (1.03–3.44) 0.009 1.70 (0.92–3.15) 0.034   Alcohol <1 unit week−1 30 1.00   1.00     1–7 units week−1 39 1.69 (1.04–2.74)   1.53 (0.94–2.49)     >7 units week−1 26 1.81 (1.04–3.15) 0.025 1.53 (0.87–2.69) 0.118   Social class I–II 29 1.00   1.00     III–V 24 1.46 (0.85–2.52) 0.183 1.44 (0.83–2.48) 0.161   Other/unknown 42 0.97 (0.53–1.76)   0.98 (0.54–1.78)     Exercisee Low 76 1.00   1.00     High 19 0.82 (0.49–1.37) 0.453 0.82 (0.49–1.36) 0.440   Body mass index (kg m−2) <20 17 1.00   1.00     20−<22.5 23 0.72 (0.38–1.34)   0.69 (0.37–1.29)     22.5−<25 38 1.48 (0.83–2.66)   1.37 (0.76–2.46)     25+ 14 0.83 (0.40–1.70) 0.535 0.74 (0.36–1.53) 0.791 a The total number of cases does not always equal 95 because the level of the factor may be unknown for some cases. b Adjusted for age and sex. c P for trend (or heterogeneity between categories for sex and smoking). The test of linear trend simply ranks the categories 1, 2, 3 etc. and excludes the other or unknown category for social class. d Adjusted for age, sex, alcohol and smoking. e High exercise is defined as sport, keep fit, running or cycling at least twice a week. shows relative risks (RRs) and confidence intervals, nutritional and lifestyle factors, and colorectal cancer risk, adjusted for age and sex alone and with further adjustment for smoking and alcohol. Vegetarians showed a moderately but nonsignificantly lower risk of colorectal cancer compared with the nonvegetarians (RR 0.72, 95% CI: 0.48–1.10), but this association became weaker after adjusting for smoking and alcohol (RR 0.85, 95% CI: 0.55–1.32). Among the nonvegetarians, there was no evidence of a positive association with the frequency of meat consumption. Among the other dietary factors, the only statistically significant associations with risk were for fruit and white bread consumption. Participants with the highest consumption of fresh or dried fruit experienced a reduction of colorectal cancer risk (RR 0.57, 95% CI: 0.34–0.97, P for trend=0.041), although the association was no longer statistically significant after adjusting for smoking and alcohol. Participants eating 15 or more slices of white bread per week compared with those eating less than 15 had significantly higher risk (RR=2.25, 95% CI: 1.25–4.04; P for difference between groups=0.006), which remained highly significant after adjusting for alcohol and smoking. After adjusting for alcohol intake, both current and former smokers had an increased risk of colorectal cancer compared with the never smokers (RR=1.70, 95% CI: 0.92–3.15 and RR=1.80, 95% CI: 1.13–2.85, respectively). Among the other lifestyle factors, social class, exercise, alcohol consumption, and body mass index were not significantly associated with the risk of colorectal cancer. DISCUSSION This prospective study had a wide variation in diet due to the inclusion of a large proportion of vegetarians. The main limitation is the relatively small number of colorectal cancer cases and the lack of sophistication of the food frequency questionnaire. The present analysis did not find a significant difference in risk between nonvegetarians and vegetarians. Furthermore, no increase in risk of colorectal cancer was seen with higher meat consumption among nonvegetarians. Nevertheless, the lack of statistical association may reflect the relative small number of cases. A previous analysis of mortality in this cohort (Appleby et al, 2002) showed similar death rates for colorectal cancer in vegetarians and non-vegetarians based on 25 and 24 deaths from colorectal cancer, respectively. However, in a prospective investigation of Seventh-day Adventists (Singh and Fraser, 1998), cancer of the colon was significantly more common in non-vegetarians than in vegetarians. It could be suggested that the nonvegetarians in our study represent a healthy group compared with the population at large, and that this might account for the lack of difference between the vegetarians and non-vegetarians; however, the SIR among non-vegetarians was exactly one. Fresh or dried fruit consumption was found to be significantly associated with colorectal cancer risk, although this association became nonsignificant after adjusting for alcohol and smoking. An approximately 40% decrease in risk was seen in people eating fresh or dried fruit five or more times per week compared with persons eating less than this amount. We did not observe a significant association for brown bread and risk of colorectal cancer, but a two-fold increase in risk was detected in those consuming 15 or more slices of white bread per week. White bread consumption may be a marker of an unhealthy diet, although an adverse association of refined carbohydrates with risk has been noted before (Chatenoud et al, 1999). We did not observe a significant association between fibre and colorectal cancer risk; however, information needed to estimate dietary fibre intake was unavailable for 32 cases, and the results are compatible with a recent report of a reduction in risk with high fibre intake (Bingham et al, 2003). Our study suggested that smoking was associated with an almost two-fold increase in risk of colorectal cancer, although this association was attenuated by adjusting for alcohol consumption. The apparent adverse effect of alcohol was also partially confounded by smoking. Both the WCRF report (World Cancer Research Fund, 1997) and a comprehensive review by Potter (1999) concluded that smoking and alcohol are probable risk factors for colorectal cancer.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global cancer statistics in the year 2000.

          D Parkin (2001)
          Estimation of the burden of cancer in terms of incidence, mortality, and prevalence is a first step to appreciating appropriate control measures in a global context. The latest results of such an exercise, based on the most recent available international data, show that there were 10 million new cases, 6 million deaths, and 22 million people living with cancer in 2000. The most common cancers in terms of new cases were lung (1.2 million), breast (1.05 million), colorectal (945,000), stomach (876,000), and liver (564,000). The profile varies greatly in different populations, and the evidence suggests that this variation is mainly a consequence of different lifestyle and environmental factors, which should be amenable to preventive interventions. World population growth and ageing imply a progressive increase in the cancer burden--15 million new cases and 10 million new deaths are expected in 2020, even if current rates remain unchanged.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Dietary fibre in food and protection against colorectal cancer in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC): an observational study.

            Dietary fibre is thought to protect against colorectal cancer but this view has been challenged by recent prospective and intervention studies that showed no protective effect. We prospectively examined the association between dietary fibre intake and incidence of colorectal cancer in 519978 individuals aged 25-70 years taking part in the EPIC study, recruited from ten European countries. Participants completed a dietary questionnaire in 1992-98 and were followed up for cancer incidence. Relative risk estimates were obtained from fibre intake, categorised by sex-specific, cohort-wide quintiles, and from linear models relating the hazard ratio to fibre intake expressed as a continuous variable. Follow-up consisted of 1939011 person-years, and data for 1065 reported cases of colorectal cancer were included in the analysis. Dietary fibre in foods was inversely related to incidence of large bowel cancer (adjusted relative risk 0.75 [95% CI 0.59-0.95] for the highest versus lowest quintile of intake), the protective effect being greatest for the left side of the colon, and least for the rectum. After calibration with more detailed dietary data, the adjusted relative risk for the highest versus lowest quintile of fibre from food intake was 0.58 (0.41-0.85). No food source of fibre was significantly more protective than others, and non-food supplement sources of fibre were not investigated. In populations with low average intake of dietary fibre, an approximate doubling of total fibre intake from foods could reduce the risk of colorectal cancer by 40%.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Colorectal cancer: molecules and populations.

              J D Potter (1999)
              The epidemiology and molecular biology of colorectal cancer are reviewed with a view to understanding their interrelationship. Risk factors for colorectal neoplasia include a positive family history, meat consumption, smoking, and alcohol consumption. Important inverse associations exist with vegetables, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), hormone replacement therapy, and physical activity. There are several molecular pathways to colorectal cancer, especially the APC (adenomatous polyposis coli)-beta-catenin-Tcf (T-cell factor; a transcriptional activator) pathway and the pathway involving abnormalities of DNA mismatch repair. These are important, both in inherited syndromes (familial adenomatous polyposis [FAP] and hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer [HNPCC], respectively) and in sporadic cancers. Other less well defined pathways exist. Expression of key genes in any of these pathways may be lost by inherited or acquired mutation or by hypermethylation. The roles of several of the environmental exposures in the molecular pathways either are established (e.g., inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 by NSAIDs) or are suggested (e.g., meat and tobacco smoke as sources of specific blood-borne carcinogens; vegetables as a source of folate, antioxidants, and inducers of detoxifying enzymes). The roles of other factors (e.g., physical activity) remain obscure even when the epidemiology is quite consistent. There is also evidence that some metabolic pathways, e.g., those involving folate and heterocyclic amines, may be modified by polymorphisms in relevant genes, e.g., MTHFR (methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase) and NAT1 (N-acetyltransferase 1) and NAT2. There is at least some evidence that the general host metabolic state can provide a milieu that enhances or reduces the likelihood of cancer progression. Understanding the roles of environmental exposures and host susceptibilities in molecular pathways has implications for screening, treatment, surveillance, and prevention.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Br J Cancer
                British Journal of Cancer
                Nature Publishing Group
                0007-0920
                1532-1827
                06 January 2004
                12 January 2004
                : 90
                : 1
                : 118-121
                Affiliations
                [1 ] 1Cancer Research UK, Epidemiology Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford OX2 6HE, UK
                [2 ] 2Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, CV4 7AL, UK
                [3 ] 3Department of Human Nutrition, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
                Author notes
                [* ]Author for correspondence: Miguel.SanJoaquin@ 123456cancer.org.uk
                Article
                6601441
                10.1038/sj.bjc.6601441
                2395312
                14710217
                b2e00cd8-9c4b-4cd2-a058-c01a9e4c50cc
                Copyright 2004, Cancer Research UK
                History
                : 31 July 2003
                : 26 September 2003
                : 29 September 2003
                Categories
                Epidemiology

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                incidence,vegetarian,smoking,colorectal cancer,nutrition
                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                incidence, vegetarian, smoking, colorectal cancer, nutrition

                Comments

                Comment on this article