Omonefe O Omofuma1, Susan E Steck2,3, Andrew F Olshan4, Melissa A Troester4. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USA. stecks@mailbox.sc.edu. 3. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Room 456, Discovery I Building, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA. stecks@mailbox.sc.edu. 4. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We examined the associations between intake of meat and fish by preparation methods and breast cancer in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, a racially diverse population-based case-control study. METHODS: African American (AA) and European American (EA) women aged 20-74 years with a first diagnosis of invasive or in situ breast cancers were frequency matched by race and age group to controls identified through the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles and Medicare lists [AA: 548 cases, 452 controls; EA: 858 cases, 748 controls]. Participants self-reported meat preparation methods and intake frequencies. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age, race, alcohol intake, body mass index, family income, lactation, marital status, use of oral contraceptives, postmenopausal hormone use, smoking status, and offsets. RESULTS: Positive associations with breast cancer were observed for intakes of grilled/barbecued hamburger (≥ once/week, OR: 1.28; 95% CI 1.01, 1.63), and pan-fried/oven-broiled beef steak (≥ once/week, OR: 1.36; 95% CI 1.08, 1.72). Inverse associations were observed for pan-fried fish (≥ once/week, OR: 0.77; 95% CI 0.60, 0.98), and for grilled/ barbecued pork chops (> 0 time/week OR: 0.81, 95% CI 0.68, 0.97). Associations tended to be stronger among EA women than among AA women. CONCLUSION: More frequent consumption of beef prepared with high temperature methods was associated with higher odds of breast cancer while more frequent consumption of pan-fried fish or grilled/barbecued pork chops was associated with lower odds of breast cancer.
PURPOSE: We examined the associations between intake of meat and fish by preparation methods and breast cancer in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, a racially diverse population-based case-control study. METHODS: African American (AA) and European American (EA) women aged 20-74 years with a first diagnosis of invasive or in situ breast cancers were frequency matched by race and age group to controls identified through the North Carolina Division of Motor Vehicles and Medicare lists [AA: 548 cases, 452 controls; EA: 858 cases, 748 controls]. Participants self-reported meat preparation methods and intake frequencies. Adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age, race, alcohol intake, body mass index, family income, lactation, marital status, use of oral contraceptives, postmenopausal hormone use, smoking status, and offsets. RESULTS: Positive associations with breast cancer were observed for intakes of grilled/barbecued hamburger (≥ once/week, OR: 1.28; 95% CI 1.01, 1.63), and pan-fried/oven-broiled beef steak (≥ once/week, OR: 1.36; 95% CI 1.08, 1.72). Inverse associations were observed for pan-fried fish (≥ once/week, OR: 0.77; 95% CI 0.60, 0.98), and for grilled/ barbecued pork chops (> 0 time/week OR: 0.81, 95% CI 0.68, 0.97). Associations tended to be stronger among EA women than among AA women. CONCLUSION: More frequent consumption of beef prepared with high temperature methods was associated with higher odds of breast cancer while more frequent consumption of pan-fried fish or grilled/barbecued pork chops was associated with lower odds of breast cancer.
Authors: Alexandra J White; Patrick T Bradshaw; Amy H Herring; Susan L Teitelbaum; Jan Beyea; Steven D Stellman; Susan E Steck; Irina Mordukhovich; Sybil M Eng; Lawrence S Engel; Kathleen Conway; Maureen Hatch; Alfred I Neugut; Regina M Santella; Marilie D Gammon Journal: Environ Int Date: 2016-02-13 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Zhenming Fu; Sandra L Deming; Alecia M Fair; Martha J Shrubsole; Debra M Wujcik; Xiao-Ou Shu; Mark Kelley; Wei Zheng Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-05-03 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Jeanine M Genkinger; Kepher H Makambi; Julie R Palmer; Lynn Rosenberg; Lucile L Adams-Campbell Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2013-01-18 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: W Zheng; D R Gustafson; R Sinha; J R Cerhan; D Moore; C P Hong; K E Anderson; L H Kushi; T A Sellers; A R Folsom Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1998-11-18 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Valeria Pala; Vittorio Krogh; Franco Berrino; Sabina Sieri; Sara Grioni; Anne Tjønneland; Anja Olsen; Marianne Uhre Jakobsen; Kim Overvad; Françoise Clavel-Chapelon; Marie-Christine Boutron-Ruault; Isabelle Romieu; Jakob Linseisen; Sabine Rohrmann; Heiner Boeing; Annika Steffen; Antonia Trichopoulou; Vassiliki Benetou; Androniki Naska; Paolo Vineis; Rosario Tumino; Salvatore Panico; Giovanna Masala; Claudia Agnoli; Dagrun Engeset; Guri Skeie; Eiliv Lund; Eva Ardanaz; Carmen Navarro; Maria-José Sánchez; Pilar Amiano; Carlos Alberto Gonzalez Svatetz; Laudina Rodriguez; Elisabet Wirfält; Jonas Manjer; Per Lenner; Göran Hallmans; Petra H M Peeters; Carla H van Gils; H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita; Fränzel J B van Duijnhoven; Timothy J Key; Elizabeth Spencer; Sheila Bingham; Kay-Tee Khaw; Pietro Ferrari; Graham Byrnes; Sabina Rinaldi; Teresa Norat; Dominique S Michaud; Elio Riboli Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2009-06-02 Impact factor: 7.045