Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34910194›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of nutrition2022

A Prospective Analysis of Red and Processed Meat Intake in Relation to Colorectal Cancer in the Black Women's Health Study.

Ioanna Yiannakou, Lauren E Barber, Shanshan Li, Lucile L Adams-Campbell, Julie R Palmer, Lynn Rosenberg, Jessica L Petrick

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
2.9field-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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ioanna YiannakouDivision of Graduate Medical Sciences, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0003-4910-0013
Lauren E BarberSlone Epidemiology Center at Boston University, Boston, MA.
Shanshan LiSlone Epidemiology Center at Boston University, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0001-9177-1385
Lucile L Adams-CampbellDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.ORCID 0000-0002-3444-3884
Julie R PalmerSlone Epidemiology Center at Boston University, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0002-6534-335X
Lynn RosenbergSlone Epidemiology Center at Boston University, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0003-2760-2987
Jessica L PetrickSlone Epidemiology Center at Boston University, Boston, MA.ORCID 0000-0001-6580-450X
Boston University · USGeorgetown University · US

Funding

A Follow-up Study for Causes of Cancer in Black WomenU01CA164974 · NCI · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI Kimberly A. Bertrand, Yvette C Cozier · 2017 to 2026
$24.0M
FOLLOW-UP STUDY FOR CAUSES OF ILLNESS IN BLACK WOMENR01CA058420 · NCI · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI ROSENBERG, LYNN · 1999 to 2013
$20.7M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA058420NCI NIH HHS U01 CA164974NIH HHS U01 CA164974
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBlack Americans have the highest incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) of any racial/ethnic group in the United States. High intake of red and processed meats has been associated with an increased CRC risk in predominately White populations. However, 3 prior studies in Black populations, who have been reported to have high intakes of red and processed meats, have reported no associations. Data on a possible association between CRC risk and SFAs and MUFAs, the primary types of fat in red and processed meats, are inconclusive.

objectivesWe prospectively assessed intakes of processed and unprocessed red meat, SFAs, and MUFAs in relation to CRC risk, utilizing data from the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS, 1995-2018).

methodsDietary data were derived from validated FFQs completed in 1995 and 2001. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression.

resultsAmong 52,695 BWHS participants aged 21-69 y at baseline and followed for ≤22 y, 564 women developed incident CRC. Unprocessed red meat intake was associated with a 33% increased CRC risk per 100 g/d (HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.03-1.71). Examination of CRC anatomic sites revealed that unprocessed red meat was associated with 2-times increased rectal cancer risk (HR: 2.22; 95% CI: 1.15-4.26). There was no evidence of an interaction with age (pinteraction = 0.4), but unprocessed red meat intake was only associated with a significant increased risk of late-onset CRC (≥50 y of age, HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.05-1.88). Processed red meat and total SFA and MUFA intakes were not associated with CRC risk.

conclusionsUnprocessed red meat intake was associated with an increased CRC risk in the present study, the first positive evidence that red meat plays a role in the etiology of CRC in Black women. The findings suggest prevention opportunities.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsRed MeatDietFemaleHumansMeatProspective StudiesRisk FactorsUnited StatesWomen's Healthcohort studycolorectal cancerepidemiologyfatty acidsfood frequency questionnairehuman

Identifiers

PMID34910194
PMCPMC9071344
OpenAlexW4200280336

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.