Camille Pouchieu1, Mélanie Deschasaux2, Serge Hercberg3, Nathalie Druesne-Pecollo2, Paule Latino-Martel2, Mathilde Touvier2. 1. Sorbonne Paris Cité, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Research Center, Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Inserm U1153; Inra U1125; Cnam; Paris 13,7 and 5 Universities, Bobigny, France and Public Health Department, Avicenne Hospital, Bobigny, France c.pouchieu@uren.smbh.univ-paris13.fr. 2. Sorbonne Paris Cité, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Research Center, Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Inserm U1153; Inra U1125; Cnam; Paris 13,7 and 5 Universities, Bobigny, France and Public Health Department, Avicenne Hospital, Bobigny, France. 3. Sorbonne Paris Cité, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Research Center, Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Inserm U1153; Inra U1125; Cnam; Paris 13,7 and 5 Universities, Bobigny, France and Public Health Department, Avicenne Hospital, Bobigny, France Sorbonne Paris Cité, Epidemiology and Biostatistics Research Center, Nutritional Epidemiology Research Team (EREN), Inserm U1153; Inra U1125; Cnam; Paris 13,7 and 5 Universities, Bobigny, France and Public Health Department, Avicenne Hospital, Bobigny, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The level of evidence regarding the association between red and processed meat intakes and breast cancer risk is still low, due to insufficient prospective studies. Moreover, mechanistic data suggest that some antioxidants may modulate this relationship but epidemiological evidence is lacking. Our objectives were to investigate relationships between red and processed meat intakes and breast cancer risk, and to study whether an antioxidant supplementation modulates these associations, which, to our knowledge, has never been investigated before. METHODS: The SU.VI.MAX study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which participants received a combination of low-dose antioxidants or a placebofrom 1994 to 2002. This observational prospective analysis included 4684 women among whom 190 developed a first incident breast cancer between 1994 and 2007 [mean (range) follow-up=11.3 (0-13)years]. Baseline dietary data were assessed by repeated dietary records in 1994-1995. Associations between quartiles of red and processed meat intakes and breast cancer risk were characterized by multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS:Breast cancer risk was directly associated with processed meat intake [hazard ratio (HR)Q4vsQ1=1.45 (0.92-2.27), Ptrend=0.03] and this association was stronger when excluding cooked ham [HRQ4vsQ1=1.90 (1.18-3.05), Ptrend=0.005]. In stratified analyses, processed meat intake was directly associated with breast cancer risk in the placebo group only [HRQ4vsQ1=2.46 (1.28-4.72), Ptrend=0.001], but not in the supplemented group [HRQ4vsQ1=0.86 (0.45-1.63), Ptrend=0.7]. CONCLUSION: Processed meat intake was prospectively associated with increased breast cancer risk. This study also suggests that antioxidants may modulate this association by counteracting the potential pro-carcinogenic effects of processed meat on breast cancer.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The level of evidence regarding the association between red and processed meat intakes and breast cancer risk is still low, due to insufficient prospective studies. Moreover, mechanistic data suggest that some antioxidants may modulate this relationship but epidemiological evidence is lacking. Our objectives were to investigate relationships between red and processed meat intakes and breast cancer risk, and to study whether an antioxidant supplementation modulates these associations, which, to our knowledge, has never been investigated before. METHODS: The SU.VI.MAX study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which participants received a combination of low-dose antioxidants or a placebo from 1994 to 2002. This observational prospective analysis included 4684 women among whom 190 developed a first incident breast cancer between 1994 and 2007 [mean (range) follow-up=11.3 (0-13)years]. Baseline dietary data were assessed by repeated dietary records in 1994-1995. Associations between quartiles of red and processed meat intakes and breast cancer risk were characterized by multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS:Breast cancer risk was directly associated with processed meat intake [hazard ratio (HR)Q4vsQ1=1.45 (0.92-2.27), Ptrend=0.03] and this association was stronger when excluding cooked ham [HRQ4vsQ1=1.90 (1.18-3.05), Ptrend=0.005]. In stratified analyses, processed meat intake was directly associated with breast cancer risk in the placebo group only [HRQ4vsQ1=2.46 (1.28-4.72), Ptrend=0.001], but not in the supplemented group [HRQ4vsQ1=0.86 (0.45-1.63), Ptrend=0.7]. CONCLUSION: Processed meat intake was prospectively associated with increased breast cancer risk. This study also suggests that antioxidants may modulate this association by counteracting the potential pro-carcinogenic effects of processed meat on breast cancer.
Authors: Andre E Kim; Abbie Lundgreen; Roger K Wolff; Laura Fejerman; Esther M John; Gabriela Torres-Mejía; Sue A Ingles; Stephanie D Boone; Avonne E Connor; Lisa M Hines; Kathy B Baumgartner; Anna Giuliano; Amit D Joshi; Martha L Slattery; Mariana C Stern Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Maryam S Farvid; Mariana C Stern; Teresa Norat; Shizuka Sasazuki; Paolo Vineis; Matty P Weijenberg; Alicja Wolk; Kana Wu; Bernard W Stewart; Eunyoung Cho Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Jenny Ruedlinger; Vicente Cid-Ossandón; Andrea Huidobro; Vanessa Van De Wyngard; Claudio Vargas; Catterina Ferreccio Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2022-08-18
Authors: Haley Lescinsky; Ashkan Afshin; Charlie Ashbaugh; Catherine Bisignano; Michael Brauer; Giannina Ferrara; Simon I Hay; Jiawei He; Vincent Iannucci; Laurie B Marczak; Susan A McLaughlin; Erin C Mullany; Marie C Parent; Audrey L Serfes; Reed J D Sorensen; Aleksandr Y Aravkin; Peng Zheng; Christopher J L Murray Journal: Nat Med Date: 2022-10-10 Impact factor: 87.241