4.3 Article

A case-control study of dietary phytoestrogens and testicular cancer risk

Journal

NUTRITION AND CANCER-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
Volume 44, Issue 1, Pages 44-51

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1207/S15327914NC441_6

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [R25CA057730] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER
  2. NCI NIH HHS [R25-CA-57730] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A few dietary studies have found elevated testicular cancer risks for higher red meat, fat, and milk intakes and lower intakes of fruits, vegetables, and fiber. Because hormonal modulation by dietary intake of plant estrogens could affect risk of testicular cancer, we chose to explore the possible relationship between dietary phytoestrogens and testicular cancer. We conducted a hospital-based case-control study of 159 testicular cancer cases diagnosed between 1996 and 1996 and 136 adult friend-matched controls at the University of Texas M D. Anderson Cancer Center. Amounts of phytoestrogenic compounds in foods were added to the National Cancer Institute's DietSys program and then grouped into prelignans, lignans, flavonoids, isoflavonoids, phytosterols, and coumestrol for statistical analysis, expressed per 1,000 kcal. The results of multivariate logistic regression analysis showed, after ad. justment for age, education, income, ethnicity, cryptorchidism, body mass index, baldness unrelated to therapy, severe acne in adolescence, early puberty, daily fiber and fat intake, and total daily calories, no discernable monotonic increased or decreased risk estimates across quartiles of phytoestrogen intake. A U-shaped pattern was observed for lignans and coumestrol. Further evaluation of this pattern by cubic spline parameterization did fit the data, but the data were also consistent with no effect. This hypothesis-generating study does not support the premise that dietary phytoestrogens increase or decrease testicular cancer risk in young men.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available