Donghui Li1, Jiali Zheng2, Rikita Hatia2, Manal Hassan2, Carrie R Daniel2. 1. Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Epidemiological findings on dietary fat intake and risk of pancreatic cancer (PanC) are inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the association between types of dietary fat intake and PanC. METHODS: We conducted a hospital-based case-control study in 957 pathologically confirmed PanC cases and 938 cancer-free controls. Cases and controls were frequency matched by age, sex, and race. Dietary information was collected using a self-administered validated FFQ. Unconditional logistic regression models were used to estimate the ORs and 95% CIs of PanC risk by quintiles of fat intake with the lowest quintile as referent and with adjustment for other risk factors and dietary factors. RESULTS: We observed no difference in (median) intake of total fat standardized for energy among cases versus controls. The multivariable-adjusted OR (95% CI) of the highest versus the lowest quintile of intake (ORQ5 compared with Q1) was 2.51 (1.68-3.72) for fat from animal sources and 0.41 (0.29-0.58) for fat from plant sources. Intakes of total MUFA, total PUFA, and linoleic (n-6) and long chain n-3 fatty acids were inversely associated with PanC (ORQ5 compared with Q1 and 95% CI: 0.55 [0.36-0.82], 0.59 [0.42-0.82], 0.64 [0.43-0.84], and 0.60 [0.42-0.84], respectively). Arachidonic acid (n-6) and several SFAs were positively associated with PanC. CONCLUSION: Although some observed associations with pancreatic cancer risk could be explained by reverse causation, the potential protective associations with intakes of largely plant-derived PUFAs and MUFAs and fish-derived long chain n-3 PUFAs warrant further prospective investigation.
BACKGROUND: Epidemiological findings on dietary fat intake and risk of pancreatic cancer (PanC) are inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the association between types of dietary fat intake and PanC. METHODS: We conducted a hospital-based case-control study in 957 pathologically confirmed PanC cases and 938 cancer-free controls. Cases and controls were frequency matched by age, sex, and race. Dietary information was collected using a self-administered validated FFQ. Unconditional logistic regression models were used to estimate the ORs and 95% CIs of PanC risk by quintiles of fat intake with the lowest quintile as referent and with adjustment for other risk factors and dietary factors. RESULTS: We observed no difference in (median) intake of total fat standardized for energy among cases versus controls. The multivariable-adjusted OR (95% CI) of the highest versus the lowest quintile of intake (ORQ5 compared with Q1) was 2.51 (1.68-3.72) for fat from animal sources and 0.41 (0.29-0.58) for fat from plant sources. Intakes of total MUFA, total PUFA, and linoleic (n-6) and long chain n-3 fatty acids were inversely associated with PanC (ORQ5 compared with Q1 and 95% CI: 0.55 [0.36-0.82], 0.59 [0.42-0.82], 0.64 [0.43-0.84], and 0.60 [0.42-0.84], respectively). Arachidonic acid (n-6) and several SFAs were positively associated with PanC. CONCLUSION: Although some observed associations with pancreatic cancer risk could be explained by reverse causation, the potential protective associations with intakes of largely plant-derived PUFAs and MUFAs and fish-derived long chain n-3 PUFAs warrant further prospective investigation.
Authors: Ute Nöthlings; Lynne R Wilkens; Suzanne P Murphy; Jean H Hankin; Brian E Henderson; Laurence N Kolonel Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2005-10-05 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Vanessa L Z Gordon-Dseagu; Frances E Thompson; Amy F Subar; Elizabeth H Ruder; Anne C M Thiébaut; Nancy Potischman; Rachael Stolzenberg-Solomon Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Ka He; Pengcheng Xun; Theodore M Brasky; Marilie D Gammon; June Stevens; Emily White Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2012-12-05 Impact factor: 4.897