Fred K Tabung1,2, Weike Wang1,2, Teresa T Fung1,3, Stephanie A Smith-Warner1,2, NaNa Keum1,4, Kana Wu1, Charles S Fuchs5,6, Frank B Hu1,2,7, Edward L Giovannucci1,2,7. 1. Departments of Nutrition, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA. 2. Departments of Epidemiology, Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA. 3. Department of Nutrition, Simmons College, Boston, MA. 4. Department of Food Science and Biotechnology, Dongguk University, Goyang, South Korea. 5. Smilow Cancer Hospital at Yale University Cancer Center, New Haven, CT. 6. Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 7. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA.
Abstract
Background: Insulin response may be important in colorectal cancer development. Diet modulates insulin response and may be a modifiable factor in colorectal cancer prevention. Objective: We examined associations between hyperinsulinemic diets and colorectal cancer risk with the use of an empirical dietary index for hyperinsulinemia (EDIH), a food-based index that characterizes dietary insulinemic potential on the basis of circulating C-peptide concentrations. Design: Diet was assessed every 4 y with food-frequency questionnaires in 46,210 men (Health Professionals Follow-Up Study, 1986-2012) and 74,191 women (Nurses' Health Study, 1984-2012) to calculate EDIH scores. Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression was used to calculate HRs and 95% CIs for colorectal, proximal/distal colon, and rectal cancer risk. Results: During 26 y of follow-up, we documented 2683 incident colorectal cancer cases. Comparing participants in the highest with those in the lowest quintiles, higher EDIH scores were associated with 33% (men: HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.11, 1.61; P-trend = 0.0005), 22% (women: HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.45; P-trend = 0.01), and 26% (men and women: pooled HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.12, 1.42; P-trend <0.0001) higher risk of developing colorectal cancer. The positive associations were limited to the distal colon and rectum in men and to the distal and proximal colon in women; however, combined risk estimates were significant for all anatomic locations except for the rectum. For example, comparing participants in extreme EDIH quintiles, there was no significant association for proximal colon cancer in men (HR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.84, 1.57; P-trend = 0.32), but the risk was elevated for distal colon (HR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.14, 2.32; P-trend = 0.002) and rectal (HR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.44; P-trend = 0.01) cancer. Among women, the risk was elevated for proximal (HR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.63; P-trend = 0.03) and distal (HR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.05, 2.03; P-trend = 0.03) colon cancer but not for rectal cancer (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.60, 1.29; P-trend = 0.61). Conclusion: The findings suggest that the insulinemic potential of diet may partly underlie the influence of dietary intake on colorectal cancer development. This observational study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03364582.
Background: Insulin response may be important in colorectal cancer development. Diet modulates insulin response and may be a modifiable factor in colorectal cancer prevention. Objective: We examined associations between hyperinsulinemic diets and colorectal cancer risk with the use of an empirical dietary index for hyperinsulinemia (EDIH), a food-based index that characterizes dietary insulinemic potential on the basis of circulating C-peptide concentrations. Design: Diet was assessed every 4 y with food-frequency questionnaires in 46,210 men (Health Professionals Follow-Up Study, 1986-2012) and 74,191 women (Nurses' Health Study, 1984-2012) to calculate EDIH scores. Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression was used to calculate HRs and 95% CIs for colorectal, proximal/distal colon, and rectal cancer risk. Results: During 26 y of follow-up, we documented 2683 incident colorectal cancer cases. Comparing participants in the highest with those in the lowest quintiles, higher EDIH scores were associated with 33% (men: HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.11, 1.61; P-trend = 0.0005), 22% (women: HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.03, 1.45; P-trend = 0.01), and 26% (men and women: pooled HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.12, 1.42; P-trend <0.0001) higher risk of developing colorectal cancer. The positive associations were limited to the distal colon and rectum in men and to the distal and proximal colon in women; however, combined risk estimates were significant for all anatomic locations except for the rectum. For example, comparing participants in extreme EDIH quintiles, there was no significant association for proximal colon cancer in men (HR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.84, 1.57; P-trend = 0.32), but the risk was elevated for distal colon (HR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.14, 2.32; P-trend = 0.002) and rectal (HR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.44; P-trend = 0.01) cancer. Among women, the risk was elevated for proximal (HR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.00, 1.63; P-trend = 0.03) and distal (HR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.05, 2.03; P-trend = 0.03) colon cancer but not for rectal cancer (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.60, 1.29; P-trend = 0.61). Conclusion: The findings suggest that the insulinemic potential of diet may partly underlie the influence of dietary intake on colorectal cancer development. This observational study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03364582.
Authors: Teresa T Fung; Frank B Hu; Matthias Schulze; Michael Pollak; Tianying Wu; Charles S Fuchs; Edward Giovannucci Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2012-04-26 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: F B Hu; E Rimm; S A Smith-Warner; D Feskanich; M J Stampfer; A Ascherio; L Sampson; W C Willett Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 1999-02 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Esther K Wei; Jing Ma; Michael N Pollak; Nader Rifai; Charles S Fuchs; Susan E Hankinson; Edward Giovannucci Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Teresa Fung; Frank B Hu; Charles Fuchs; Edward Giovannucci; David J Hunter; Meir J Stampfer; Graham A Colditz; Walter C Willett Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2003-02-10
Authors: Fred K Tabung; Weike Wang; Teresa T Fung; Frank B Hu; Stephanie A Smith-Warner; Jorge E Chavarro; Charles S Fuchs; Walter C Willett; Edward L Giovannucci Journal: Br J Nutr Date: 2016-11-08 Impact factor: 3.718
Authors: Elizabeth M Cespedes; Frank B Hu; Lesley Tinker; Bernard Rosner; Susan Redline; Lorena Garcia; Melanie Hingle; Linda Van Horn; Barbara V Howard; Emily B Levitan; Wenjun Li; JoAnn E Manson; Lawrence S Phillips; Jinnie J Rhee; Molly E Waring; Marian L Neuhouser Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Fred K Tabung; Li Liu; Weike Wang; Teresa T Fung; Kana Wu; Stephanie A Smith-Warner; Yin Cao; Frank B Hu; Shuji Ogino; Charles S Fuchs; Edward L Giovannucci Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2018-03-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Charles S Fuchs; En Cheng; Sui Zhang; Fang-Shu Ou; Brian Mullen; Kimmie Ng; Leonard B Saltz; Donna Niedzwiecki; Robert J Mayer; Rex B Mowat; Renaud Whittom; Alexander Hantel; Al Benson; Daniel Atienza; Michael Messino; Hedy Kindler; Edward L Giovannucci; Erin L Van Blarigan Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-06-04 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Yi Wan; Fred K Tabung; Dong Hoon Lee; Teresa T Fung; Walter C Willett; Edward L Giovannucci Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2022-02-01 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Yin Zhang; Mingyang Song; Chen Yuan; Andrew T Chan; Eva S Schernhammer; Brian M Wolpin; Meir J Stampfer; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Charles S Fuchs; Susan B Roberts; Eric B Rimm; Walter C Willett; Frank B Hu; Edward L Giovannucci; Kimmie Ng Journal: Clin Nutr Date: 2021-09-17 Impact factor: 7.324
Authors: Liang Wang; Chun-Han Lo; Xiaosheng He; Dong Hang; Molin Wang; Kana Wu; Andrew T Chan; Shuji Ogino; Edward L Giovannucci; Mingyang Song Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 22.682