4.7 Article

Fruits and vegetables and renal cell carcinoma:: Findings from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 118, Issue 12, Pages 3133-3139

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.21765

Keywords

cohort study; epidemiology; food; incidence; kidney cancer

Categories

Funding

  1. Wellcome Trust Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We examined the association between fruits and vegetables and risk of renal cell carcinoma (RCC) in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Dietary intake data and complete follow-up information on cancer incidence were available for 375,851 participants recruited in EPIC centers of 8 countries. During an average follow-up of 6.2 years, 306 incident cases of RCC were identified. The associations of consumption of total vegetables, total fruits, combined total fruits and vegetables and specific subtypes of vegetables with RCC risk were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards, stratified by centre and adjusted for potential confounders. No significant associations between fruit and vegetable consumption and RCC risk were observed despite a wide range of intake. The estimated relative risks (95% confidence intervals [CI]) in men and women combined were 0.97 (0.85-1.11) per 40 g increase in vegetable intake, 1.03 (0.97-1.08) per 40 g increase in fruit intake and 1.02 (0.93-1.11) per 80 g increase in fruit and vegetable intake combined. Among the vegetable subtypes, an inverse association was observed for root vegetables (RR per 8 g increase: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.78-0.99). These results suggest that total consumption of fruits and vegetables is not related to risk of RCC, although we cannot exclude the possibility that very low consumption is related to higher risk. The relationship of specific fruit and vegetable subgroups with RCC risk warrant further investigation. (c) 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available