Article

Meat and dairy food consumption and breast cancer: A pooled analysis of cohort studies

Maastricht University, Maestricht, Limburg, Netherlands
International Journal of Epidemiology (Impact Factor: 9.18). 03/2002; 31(1):78-85. DOI: 10.1093/ije/31.1.78
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT

More than 20 studies have investigated the relation between meat and dairy food consumption and breast cancer risk with conflicting results. Our objective was to evaluate the risk of breast cancer associated with meat and dairy food consumption and to assess whether non-dietary risk factors modify the relation.
We combined the primary data from eight prospective cohort studies from North America and Western Europe with at least 200 incident breast cancer cases, assessment of usual food and nutrient intakes, and a validation study of the dietary assessment instrument. The pooled database included 351,041 women, 7379 of whom were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer during up to 15 years of follow-up.
We found no significant association between intakes of total meat, red meat, white meat, total dairy fluids, or total dairy solids and breast cancer risk. Categorical analyses suggested a J-shaped association for egg consumption where, compared to women who did not eat eggs, breast cancer risk was slightly decreased among women who consumed < 2 eggs per week but slightly increased among women who consumed > or = 1 egg per day.
We found no significant associations between intake of meat or dairy products and risk of breast cancer. An inconsistent relation between egg consumption and risk of breast cancer merits further investigation.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Alicja Wolk
    • "A previous study that examined the per capita milk consumption among 27 countries found that it was positively associated with ovarian cancer risk (Cramer, 1989); however, subsequent epidemiological studies gave inconsistent results (Larsson et al, 2004; Genkinger et al, 2006; Larsson et al, 2006). In addition, the associations of dairy products with breast (Boyd et al, 1993; Missmer et al, 2002; Moorman and Terry, 2004; Dong et al, 2011) and lung cancers (Axelsson and Rylander, 2002) (Kubik et al, 2004; van der Pols et al, 2007) were also inconclusive. A recent review by the World Cancer Research Fund and American Institute of Cancer Research claimed no sufficient evidence to establish associations between dairy intake and breast cancer risk (World Cancer Research Fund, 2007). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Individuals with lactose intolerance are recommended to avoid milk or dairy products, which may affect the development of cancer. Methods: We identified individuals with lactose intolerance from several Swedish Registers linked to the Swedish Cancer Registry to calculate standardised incidence ratios (SIRs) for cancers in the breast, lung, and ovary. Results: A total of 22,788 individuals with lactose intolerance were identified, and their risks of lung (SIR=0.55), breast (SIR=0.79), and ovarian (SIR=0.61) cancers were significantly decreased. Cancer incidences in the siblings and parents of individuals with lactose intolerance were similar to those in the general population. Conclusions: In this large cohort study, people with lactose intolerance, characterised by low consumption of milk and other dairy products, had decreased risks of lung, breast, and ovarian cancers, but the decreased risks were not found in their family members, suggesting that the protective effects against these cancers may be related to their specific dietary pattern.
    No preview · Article · Oct 2014 · British Journal of Cancer
  • Source
    • "Studies report that high consumption of fruit and vegetables may offer significant protection against breast cancer [57-60]. Meat, especially red meat intake, is reported by some studies to be associated with increased breast cancer risk [61-63], though a few studies found no association [64,65]. A review of 13 prospective studies claim that higher fat intake does not confer excess risk of breast cancer [66]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In England, guidance from National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) states women with a family history of breast cancer presenting to primary care should be reassured or referred.We reviewed the evidence for interventions that might be applied in primary care and conducted an audit of whether low risk women are correctly advised and flagged. We conducted a literature review to identify modifiable risk factors. We extracted routinely collected data from the computerised medical record systems of 6 general practices (population approximately 30,000); of the variables identified in the guidance. We implemented a quality improvement (QI) intervention called audit-based education (ABE) comparing participant practices with guidelines and each other before and after; we report odds ratios (OR) of any change in data recording. The review revealed evidence for advising on: diet, weight control, physical exercise, and alcohol. The proportion of patients with recordings of family history of: disease, neoplasms, and breast cancer were: 39.3%, 5.1% and 1.3% respectively. There was no significant change in the recording of family history of disease or cancer; OR 1.02 (95% CI 0.98-1.06); and 1.08 (95% CI 0.99-1.17) respectively. Recording of alcohol consumption and smoking both increased significantly; OR 1.36 (95% CI 1.30-1.43); and 1.42 (95% CI 1.27-1.60) respectively. Recording lifestyle advice fell; OR 0.84 (95% CI 0.81-0.88). The study informs about current data recording and willingness to engage in ABE. Recording of risk factors improved after the intervention. Further QI is needed to achieve adherence to current guidance.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2013 · BMC Family Practice
  • Source
    • "However, the WCRF-AICR report concluded the risk was not convincing nor probable but limitedsuggestive . The link seems much weaker with breast and prostate cancers, and did show up neither in a breast cancer meta-analysis (Missmer, et al., 2002), nor in the very large European EPIC study of half a million persons. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The effect of meat consumption on cancer risk is a controversial issue. However, recent meta-analyses show that high consumers of cured meats and red meat are at increased risk of colorectal cancer. This increase is significant but modest (20-30%). Current WCRF-AICR recommendations are to eat no more than 500 g per week of red meat, and to avoid processed meat. Moreover, our studies show that beef meat and cured pork meat promote colon carcinogenesis in rats. The major promoter in meat is heme iron, via N-nitrosation or fat peroxidation. Dietary additives can suppress the toxic effects of heme iron. For instance, promotion of colon carcinogenesis in rats by cooked, nitrite-treated and oxidized high-heme cured meat was suppressed by dietary calcium and by α-tocopherol, and a study in volunteers supported these protective effects in humans. These additives, and others still under study, could provide an acceptable way to prevent colorectal cancer.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2011 · Meat Science
Show more