J Cade1, E Thomas, A Vail. 1. Public Health Division, Nuffield Institute for Health, University of Leeds.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To explore dietary risk factors, in particular fat intake, for breast cancer, using an approach to reduce recall bias of subjects and so provide a more reliable estimate of dietary intake than previous similar studies. DESIGN: A case-control study of women aged 50-65 years attending the breast assessment clinics of the breast screening programme in Southampton and Portsmouth, southern England. Data were analysed for all women requiring further clinical procedures; all women recalled to have an early rescreen; and a random sample of women found to be normal and referred for a routine rescreening appointment (standard recall). MEASUREMENTS: An interview obtained information on various lifestyle characteristics including smoking and alcohol intake, weight, waist, and hip measurements were also taken at the clinic. Women were given a detailed questionnaire on food intake to complete at home and return by post. RESULTS: 1577 women were included in the study: 220 with breast cancer (cases); 179 with benign breast disease; 353 early rescreen and 825 given a standard recall appointment. There were few differences in nutritional intake between the four groups. Logistic regression analyses were carried out comparing the dietary intake of cases with that of each control group adjusting for important demographic and reproductive factors. Results for the case and standard recall comparison are presented. The only non-calorific nutrient to reach significance was iron, which was negatively associated with risk (p = 0.03). For fat intake, the odds decreased with increasing polyunsaturated fat (p = 0.15), showed no trend with monounsaturated fat (p = 0.37) and increased (p = 0.10) with increasing saturated fat. No pattern was clear for the other calorie providing nutrients. CONCLUSIONS: In line with recent cohort studies, this study has shown no evidence to support the hypothesis that dietary fat is an important contributor to breast cancer rates. Biases should have been reduced by studying subjects from the screening programme who were at an early stage of disease.
OBJECTIVES: To explore dietary risk factors, in particular fat intake, for breast cancer, using an approach to reduce recall bias of subjects and so provide a more reliable estimate of dietary intake than previous similar studies. DESIGN: A case-control study of women aged 50-65 years attending the breast assessment clinics of the breast screening programme in Southampton and Portsmouth, southern England. Data were analysed for all women requiring further clinical procedures; all women recalled to have an early rescreen; and a random sample of women found to be normal and referred for a routine rescreening appointment (standard recall). MEASUREMENTS: An interview obtained information on various lifestyle characteristics including smoking and alcohol intake, weight, waist, and hip measurements were also taken at the clinic. Women were given a detailed questionnaire on food intake to complete at home and return by post. RESULTS: 1577 women were included in the study: 220 with breast cancer (cases); 179 with benign breast disease; 353 early rescreen and 825 given a standard recall appointment. There were few differences in nutritional intake between the four groups. Logistic regression analyses were carried out comparing the dietary intake of cases with that of each control group adjusting for important demographic and reproductive factors. Results for the case and standard recall comparison are presented. The only non-calorific nutrient to reach significance was iron, which was negatively associated with risk (p = 0.03). For fat intake, the odds decreased with increasing polyunsaturated fat (p = 0.15), showed no trend with monounsaturated fat (p = 0.37) and increased (p = 0.10) with increasing saturated fat. No pattern was clear for the other calorie providing nutrients. CONCLUSIONS: In line with recent cohort studies, this study has shown no evidence to support the hypothesis that dietary fat is an important contributor to breast cancer rates. Biases should have been reduced by studying subjects from the screening programme who were at an early stage of disease.
Authors: G R Howe; T Hirohata; T G Hislop; J M Iscovich; J M Yuan; K Katsouyanni; F Lubin; E Marubini; B Modan; T Rohan Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1990-04-04 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: D J Hunter; J E Manson; G A Colditz; M J Stampfer; B Rosner; C H Hennekens; F E Speizer; W C Willett Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1993-07-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: S Graham; M Zielezny; J Marshall; R Priore; J Freudenheim; J Brasure; B Haughey; P Nasca; M Zdeb Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1992-12-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: E Giovannucci; M J Stampfer; G A Colditz; J E Manson; B A Rosner; M Longnecker; F E Speizer; W C Willett Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1993-03-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Maureen A Murtaugh; Jennifer Herrick; Carol Sweeney; Anna Guiliano; Kathy Baumgartner; Tim Byers; Martha Slattery Journal: Nutr Cancer Date: 2011 Impact factor: 2.900
Authors: Rebecca E Graff; Eunyoung Cho; Sara Lindström; Peter Kraft; Walter C Willett; A Heather Eliassen Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Amber B Moore; Jackilen Shannon; Chu Chen; Johanna W Lampe; Roberta M Ray; Sharon K Lewis; Minggang Lin; Helge Stalsberg; David B Thomas Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2009-09-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: L M Ferrucci; A J Cross; B I Graubard; L A Brinton; C A McCarty; R G Ziegler; X Ma; S T Mayne; R Sinha Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-06-09 Impact factor: 7.640