Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29873077›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of cancer2018

Anatomical subsite can modify the association between meat and meat compounds and risk of colorectal adenocarcinoma: Findings from three large US cohorts.

Arash Etemadi, Christian C Abnet, Barry I Graubard, Laura Beane-Freeman, Neal D Freedman, Linda Liao, Sanford M Dawsey, Rashmi Sinha

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.

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

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Arash EtemadiDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.ORCID 0000-0002-3458-1072
Christian C AbnetDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Barry I GraubardDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Laura Beane-FreemanDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Neal D FreedmanDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Linda LiaoDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Sanford M DawseyDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
Rashmi SinhaDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD.
National Cancer Institute · US

Funding

Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer in the AARP CohortZIACP010196 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI SINHA, RASHMI · 2009 to 2025
$21.0M
STUDIES OF OCCUPATIONAL CANCER--PESTICIDESZ01CP010119 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI ALAVANJA, MICHAEL · 1996 to 2008
$5.0M
HEALTH EFFECTS OF EXPOSURES IN AGRICULTUREZ01ES049030 · NIEHS · NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES · PI SANDLER, DALE P · 1997 to 2008
$889k
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 CP010119Intramural NIH HHS Z01 ES049030Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Distal and proximal colon tumors have distinct incidence trends and embryonic origins; whether these sub-sites have distinct susceptibilities to known risk factors is unclear. We used pooled data from 407,270 participants in three US-based studies, with overall median follow-up of 13.8 years. We used adjusted Cox models to analyze the association between dietary intakes (from diet history questionnaire) of total, processed and unprocessed red meat; total white meat, poultry and fish and meat-related compounds: heme iron, nitrate, nitrite, the heterocyclic amines (HCAs) and benzo(a)pyrene (B(a)P) and incidence of colorectal cancer subsites. The risk of colorectal cancer (n = 6,640) increased by 35% for each 50 g/1,000 kcal higher daily intake of total red meat, with a significant right-to-left trend from proximal colon (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 1.09-1.39) to distal colon (HR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.13-1.55) and rectum (HR: 1.53; 95% CI: 1.28-1.79). Only unprocessed red meat showed a significant right-to-left trend. Each 50 g/1,000 kcal increase in white meat intake was associated with a 26% reduction in total colorectal cancer risk (HR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.68-0.80), with a significant inverse right-to-left trend. The highest quintile of heme iron was associated with increased cancer risk only in the distal colon (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 1.02-1.42) and rectum (HR: 1.27; 95% CI: 1.07-1.52). The highest quintile of HCAs, and nitrate/nitrite were associated with increased risk of total colorectal cancer, but these associations did not vary across anatomical subsites. In summary, right and left subsites of the colon may have distinct susceptibilities to meat and possibly other dietary risk factors, suggesting that the causes of colorectal cancer may vary across anatomical subsites.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAgedCohort StudiesColorectal NeoplasmsDietFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHeterocyclic CompoundsHumansMaleMeatMiddle AgedNitratesPrognosisRisk FactorsHeterocyclic CompoundsNitrates

Identifiers

PMID29873077
PMCPMC6195451
OpenAlexW2806363122

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.