Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26505173›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of cancer2016

Red and processed meat, nitrite, and heme iron intakes and postmenopausal breast cancer risk in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study.

Maki Inoue-Choi, Rashmi Sinha, Gretchen L Gierach, Mary H Ward

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

55 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 104 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Maki Inoue-ChoiOccupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Rashmi SinhaNutritional Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Gretchen L GierachHormonal and Reproductive Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
Mary H WardOccupational and Environmental Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.
National Cancer Institute · USNational Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities · US

Funding

Cancer Risk and Environmental ExposuresZIACP010125 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI PURDUE, MARK · 2009 to 2025
$41.3M
Cancer Risk: Exposure to Nitrate and PesticidesZ01CP010153 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI WARD, MARY H · 2000 to 2008
$2.6M
CLINICAL/IMMUNOLOGIC/GENETIC ANALYSES OF AUTOIMMUNE LYMPHOPROLIFERATIVE SYNDROMEZ01AI000732 · NIAID · NIAID EXTRAMURAL ACTIVITIES · PI RAO, VEMULKONDA · 1995 to 2008
$1.1M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 CP010153Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous studies have shown inconsistent associations between red and processed meat intake and breast cancer risk. N-nitroso compounds and heme iron have been hypothesized as contributing factors. We followed 193,742 postmenopausal women in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study and identified 9,305 incident breast cancers (1995-2006). Dietary intake was assessed using a food frequency questionnaire at baseline. We adjusted daily intakes of meat, nitrite and heme iron for energy intake using the nutrient density method. We estimated multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by quintiles of dietary exposures for all breast cancer, by stage (in-situ, localized, regional/distant) and by estrogen/progesterone receptor (ER/PR) status using Cox proportional hazards regression. Total red meat intake was positively associated with risk of regional/distant cancer (p-trend = 0.02). The risk was 25% higher in the highest vs. lowest intake quintile (95% CI = 1.03-1.52). Higher processed red meat intake (Q5 vs. Q1) was associated with 27% higher risk of localized breast cancer (95% CI = 1.01-1.27, p-trend = 0.03) and a 19% higher risk of regional/distant cancer (95% CI = 0.98-1.44, p-trend = 0.10). In addition, higher nitrite intake from processed red meat was positively associated with localized cancer (HR for Q5 vs. Q1 = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.09-1.39, p-trend < 0.0001). Heme iron intake was positively associated with breast cancer risk overall and all cancer stages (p-trend = 0.02-0.05). No heterogeneity was observed in risk associations by hormone receptor status. Our findings suggest that high consumption of red meat and processed meat may increase risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. Added nitrite and heme iron may partly contribute to these observed associations.

Indexed as

AgedBreast NeoplasmsCohort StudiesDietDiet SurveysFemaleHemeHumansIncidenceIron, DietaryMeat ProductsMiddle AgedNitritesOdds RatioPostmenopauseProportional Hazards ModelsHemeIron, DietaryNitritesbreast cancerheme ironnitriteprocessed meatred meat

Identifiers

PMID26505173
PMCPMC4724256
OpenAlexW1821339127

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.