SynthesisOncotarget2017
Consumption of fruits and vegetables and risk of renal cell carcinoma: a meta-analysis of observational studies.
Synthesis in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of diet in renal cell carcinoma incidence: an umbrella review of meta-analyses of observational studies.BMC medicine · 2022Pooled it
- Fruits and vegetables consumption and the risk of gallstone diasease: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Medicine · 2019Pooled it
- Plant-based diets and urological health.Nature reviews. Urology · 2025Review
- Effect of smoking, hypertension and lifestyle factors on kidney cancer - perspectives for prevention and screening programmes.Nature reviews. Urology · 2023Review
- Kidney Cancer Integrative Oncology: Possible Options for Care.Current oncology reports · 2023Review
- [Obesity and Colorectal Cancer].The Korean journal of gastroenterology = Taehan Sohwagi Hakhoe chi · 2023Review
- Food groups and urologic cancers risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.Frontiers in nutrition · 2023Review
- Polyphenols and Their Metabolites in Renal Diseases: An Overview.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Can Diet Prevent Urological Cancers? An Update on Carotenoids as Chemopreventive Agents.Nutrients · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThere have been inconsistent results about the association between consumption of fruits and vegetables and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) risk. We conducted a meta-analysis of the published observational studies to explore this association.
resultsNineteen observational studies (4 cohort, 1 pooled and 14 case-control studies), involving 10,215 subjects with RCC were part of this meta-analysis. The SRR for the highest vs. the lowest intake of vegetables was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.63-0.85; Pheterogeneity = 0.004, I2 = 53.5%), whereas for fruits it was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.75-0.98; Pheterogeneity = 0.012, I2 = 47.4%). Linear dose-response analysis also showed similar results, e.g., for per 1 serving/day increment of vegetables, the SRR was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.84-0.96) and for fruits it was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.93-1.01). Nonlinear association was only observed for vegetables (Pnonlinearity = 0.001), but not for fruits (Pnonlinearity = 0.221). MATERIALS AND
methodsEligible studies up to August 31, 2016 were identified and retrieved by searching MEDLINE and EMBASE databases along with manual review of the reference list from the retrieved studies. Quality of included studies was evaluated using Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS). Random-effects model was used to calculate summary relative risk (SRR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI).
conclusionsThis meta-analysis indicated a protective effect of consumption of vegetables and fruits on RCC risk. Further studies are warranted with prospective designs that use validated questionnaires and control for important confounders.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.