4.6 Article

Vegetable and fruit consumption and risks of colon and rectal cancer in a prospective cohort study - The Netherlands Cohort Study on Diet and Cancer

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 152, Issue 11, Pages 1081-1092

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/152.11.1081

Keywords

cohort studies; colonic neoplasms; dietary fiber; fruit; rectal neoplasms; vegetables

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The relation between vegetable and fruit consumption and colorectal cancer risk was comprehensively assessed in the Netherlands Cohort Study on Diet and Cancer using a validated 150-item food frequency questionnaire. After 6.3 years of follow-up (1986-1992), over 1,000 incident cases of colorectal cancer were registered. Using case-cohort analysis, the authors calculated rate ratios and 95% confidence intervals adjusted for age, alcohol intake, and family history of colorectal cancer. For colon cancer, no statistically significant associations with total vegetable intake or total fruit intake were found. However, among women, an inverse association was observed with vegetables and fruits combined (for the highest quintile vs. the lowest, the rate ratio was 0.66 (95% confidence interval: 0.44, 1.01)). Brassica vegetables and cooked leafy vegetables showed inverse associations for both men and women. Among women and, to a lesser extent, among men, inverse associations were stronger for distal colonic tumors than for proximal colonic tumors. For rectal cancer, no statistically significant associations were found for vegetable consumption or fruit consumption or for specific groups of vegetables and fruits; only Brassica vegetables showed a positive association in women. As in other cohort studies, the observed inverse relation between vegetable and fruit consumption and occurrence of colorectal cancer was less strong than relations reported in case-control studies.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available