Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Red and processed meat consumption and risk of ovarian cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

During the last decade, the epidemiological evidence on consumption of meat and risk of ovarian cancer has accumulated.

METHODS

We assessed the relationship between red and processed meat consumption and risk of ovarian cancer with a dose-response meta-analysis. Relevant prospective cohort studies were identified by searching the PubMed and EMBASE databases through 21 January 2011, and by reviewing the reference lists of retrieved articles. Study-specific relative risk (RR) estimates were combined using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Eight cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. The summary RR for an intake increment of 100 g per week was 1.02 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.99-1.04) for red meat and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.98-1.14) for processed meat. For an intake increment of four servings per week, the summary RR of ovarian cancer was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.97-1.19) for red meat (100 g per serving) and 1.07 (95% CI, 0.97-1.17) for processed meat (30 g per serving).

CONCLUSION

Results from this dose-response meta-analysis suggest that red and processed meat consumption is not associated with risk of ovarian cancer. Although a lower consumption of red and processed meat may offer protection against other types of cancer, other interventions are needed to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer.

Links

  • PMC Free PDF
  • PMC Free Full Text
  • FREE Publisher Full Text
  • Authors+Show Affiliations

    ,

    Division of Nutritional Epidemiology, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Box 210, Stockholm 171 77, Sweden.

    ,

    Source

    British journal of cancer 104:7 2011 Mar 29 pg 1196-201

    MeSH

    Female
    Humans
    Meat
    Meat Products
    Ovarian Neoplasms
    Prospective Studies
    Risk
    Risk Factors

    Pub Type(s)

    Journal Article
    Meta-Analysis
    Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

    Language

    eng

    PubMed ID

    21343939

    Citation

    Wallin, A, et al. "Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk of Ovarian Cancer: a Dose-response Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies." British Journal of Cancer, vol. 104, no. 7, 2011, pp. 1196-201.
    Wallin A, Orsini N, Wolk A. Red and processed meat consumption and risk of ovarian cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. Br J Cancer. 2011;104(7):1196-201.
    Wallin, A., Orsini, N., & Wolk, A. (2011). Red and processed meat consumption and risk of ovarian cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. British Journal of Cancer, 104(7), pp. 1196-201. doi:10.1038/bjc.2011.49.
    Wallin A, Orsini N, Wolk A. Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk of Ovarian Cancer: a Dose-response Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies. Br J Cancer. 2011 Mar 29;104(7):1196-201. PubMed PMID: 21343939.
    * Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
    TY - JOUR T1 - Red and processed meat consumption and risk of ovarian cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. AU - Wallin,A, AU - Orsini,N, AU - Wolk,A, Y1 - 2011/02/22/ PY - 2011/2/24/entrez PY - 2011/2/24/pubmed PY - 2011/5/27/medline SP - 1196 EP - 201 JF - British journal of cancer JO - Br. J. Cancer VL - 104 IS - 7 N2 - BACKGROUND: During the last decade, the epidemiological evidence on consumption of meat and risk of ovarian cancer has accumulated. METHODS: We assessed the relationship between red and processed meat consumption and risk of ovarian cancer with a dose-response meta-analysis. Relevant prospective cohort studies were identified by searching the PubMed and EMBASE databases through 21 January 2011, and by reviewing the reference lists of retrieved articles. Study-specific relative risk (RR) estimates were combined using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Eight cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. The summary RR for an intake increment of 100 g per week was 1.02 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.99-1.04) for red meat and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.98-1.14) for processed meat. For an intake increment of four servings per week, the summary RR of ovarian cancer was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.97-1.19) for red meat (100 g per serving) and 1.07 (95% CI, 0.97-1.17) for processed meat (30 g per serving). CONCLUSION: Results from this dose-response meta-analysis suggest that red and processed meat consumption is not associated with risk of ovarian cancer. Although a lower consumption of red and processed meat may offer protection against other types of cancer, other interventions are needed to reduce the risk of ovarian cancer. SN - 1532-1827 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/21343939/Red_and_processed_meat_consumption_and_risk_of_ovarian_cancer:_a_dose_response_meta_analysis_of_prospective_studies_ L2 - http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2011.49 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -