| 1. |
- Koushik, Anita, et al.
(författare)
-
Intake of fruits and vegetables and risk of pancreatic cancer in a pooled analysis of 14 cohort studies
- 2012
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Epidemiology. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0002-9262 .- 1476-6256. ; 176:5, s. 373-386
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Fruit and vegetable intake may protect against pancreatic cancer, since fruits and vegetables are rich in potentially cancer-preventive nutrients. Most case-control studies have found inverse associations between fruit and vegetable intake and pancreatic cancer risk, although bias due to reporting error cannot be ruled out. In most prospective studies, inverse associations have been weaker and imprecise because of small numbers of cases. The authors examined fruit and vegetable intake in relation to pancreatic cancer risk in a pooled analysis of 14 prospective studies from North America, Europe, and Australia (study periods between 1980 and 2005). Relative risks and 2-sided 95% confidence intervals were estimated separately for the 14 studies using the Cox proportional hazards model and were then pooled using a random-effects model. Of 862,584 men and women followed for 7-20 years, 2,212 developed pancreatic cancer. The pooled multivariate relative risks of pancreatic cancer per 100-g/day increase in intake were 1.01 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99, 1.03) for total fruits and vegetables, 1.01 (95% CI: 0.99, 1.03) for total fruits, and 1.02 (95% CI: 0.99, 1.06) for total vegetables. Associations were similar for men and women separately and across studies. These results suggest that fruit and vegetable intake during adulthood is not associated with a reduced pancreatic cancer risk.
|
|
| 2. |
- Lindstroem, Sara, et al.
(författare)
-
Common genetic variants in prostate cancer risk prediction-results from the NCI breast and prostate cancer cohort consortium (BPC3)
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention. - 1055-9965 .- 1538-7755. ; 21:3, s. 437-444
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: One of the goals of personalized medicine is to generate individual risk profiles that could identify individuals in the population that exhibit high risk. The discovery of more than two-dozen independent single-nucleotide polymorphism markers in prostate cancer has raised the possibility for such risk stratification. In this study, we evaluated the discriminative and predictive ability for prostate cancer risk models incorporating 25 common prostate cancer genetic markers, family history of prostate cancer, and age.Methods: We fit a series of risk models and estimated their performance in 7,509 prostate cancer cases and 7,652 controls within the National Cancer Institute Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium (BPC3). We also calculated absolute risks based on SEER incidence data.Results: The best risk model (C-statistic = 0.642) included individual genetic markers and family history of prostate cancer. We observed a decreasing trend in discriminative ability with advancing age (P = 0.009), with highest accuracy in men younger than 60 years (C-statistic = 0.679). The absolute ten-year risk for 50-year-old men with a family history ranged from 1.6% (10th percentile of genetic risk) to 6.7% (90th percentile of genetic risk). For men without family history, the risk ranged from 0.8% (10th percentile) to 3.4% (90th percentile).Conclusions: Our results indicate that incorporating genetic information and family history in prostate cancer risk models can be particularly useful for identifying younger men that might benefit from prostate-specific antigen screening.Impact: Although adding genetic risk markers improves model performance, the clinical utility of these genetic risk models is limited.
|
|
| 3. |
- Lindstroem, Sara, et al.
(författare)
-
Replication of five prostate cancer loci identified in an Asian population-results from the NCI breast and prostate cancer cohort consortium (BPC3)
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention. - Philadelphia : American Association for Cancer Research. - 1055-9965 .- 1538-7755. ; 21:1, s. 212-216
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: A recent genome-wide association study (GWAS) of prostate cancer in a Japanese population identified five novel regions not previously discovered in other ethnicities. In this study, we attempt to replicate these five loci in a series of nested prostate cancer case-control studies of European ancestry. Methods: We genotyped five single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP): rs13385191 (chromosome 2p24), rs12653946 (5p15), rs1983891 (6p21), rs339331 (6p22), and rs9600079 (13q22), in 7,956 prostate cancer cases and 8,148 controls from a series of nested case-control studies within the National cancer Institute Breast and Prostate Cancer Cohort Consortium (BPC3). We tested each SNP for association with prostate cancer risk and assessed whether associations differed with respect to disease severity and age of onset. Results: Four SNPs (rs13385191, rs12653946, rs1983891, and rs339331) were significantly associated with prostate cancer risk (P values ranging from 0.01 to 1.1 x 10(-5)). Allele frequencies and ORs were overall lower in our population of European descent than in the discovery Asian population. SNP rs13385191 (C2orf43) was only associated with low-stage disease (P = 0.009, case-only test). No other SNP showed association with disease severity or age of onset. We did not replicate the 13q22 SNP, rs9600079 (P = 0.62). Conclusions: Four SNPs associated with prostate cancer risk in an Asian population are also associated with prostate cancer risk in men of European descent. Impact: This study illustrates the importance of evaluation of prostate cancer risk markers across ethnic groups. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 21(1); 212-16. (C) 2011 AACR.
|
|
| 4. |
- Zhang, Xuehong, et al.
(författare)
-
Carotenoid intakes and risk of breast cancer defined by estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor status : a pooled analysis of 18 prospective cohort studies
- 2012
-
Ingår i: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. - : OXFORD UNIV PRESS. - 0002-9165 .- 1938-3207. ; 95:3, s. 713-725
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Epidemiologic studies examining associations between carotenoid intakes and risk of breast cancer by estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) status are limited. Objective: We investigated these associations in a pooled analysis of 18 cohort studies. Design: Of 1,028,438 participants followed for a maximum follow-up of 26 y across studies, 33,380 incident invasive breast cancers were identified. Study-specific RRs and 95% CIs were estimated by using Cox proportional hazards regression and then pooled by using a random-effects model. Results: alpha-Carotene, beta-carotene, and lutein/zeaxanthin intakes were inversely associated with the risk of ER-negative (ER-) breast cancer (pooled multivariable RRs of the comparison between the highest and lowest quintiles): alpha-carotene (0.87; 95% CI: 0.78, 0.97), beta-carotene (0.84; 95% CI: 0.77, 0.93), and lutein/zeaxanthin (0.87; 95% CI: 0.79, 0.95). These variables were not inversely associated with the risk of ER-positive (ER+) breast cancer (pooled multivariable RRs for the same comparison): a-carotene (1.04; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.09), beta-carotene (1.04; 95% CI: 0.98, 1.10), and lutein/zeaxanthin (1.00; 95% CI: 0.93, 1.07). Although the pooled RRs for quintile 5 for beta-cryptoxanthin were not significant, inverse trends were observed for ER- and ER+ breast cancer (P-trend <= 0.05). Nonsignificant associations were observed for lycopene intake. The associations were largely not appreciably modified by several breast cancer risk factors. Nonsignificant associations were observed for PR-positive and PR-negative breast cancer. Conclusions: Intakes of alpha-carotene, beta-carotene, and lutein/zeaxanthin were inversely associated with risk of ER-, but not ER+, breast cancer. However, the results need to be interpreted with caution because it is unclear whether the observed association is real or due to other constituents in the same food sources. Am J Clin Nutr 2012;95:713-25.
|
|
