Meat intake, meat cooking methods, and meat-derived mutagen exposure and risk of sessile serrated lesions

Abstract Background Red and processed meat, recognized carcinogens, are risk factors for colorectal neoplasia, including polyps, the precursor for colorectal cancer. The mechanism is unclear. One possible explanation is the mutagenic activity of these foods, perhaps due to generation during cooking [e.g., heterocyclic amine (HCA) intake]. Few studies have evaluated meat intake and sessile serrated lesion (SSL) risk, a recently recognized precursor, and no study has evaluated meat cooking methods and meat-derived mutagens with SSL risk. Objective We evaluated intakes of meat, meat cooking methods, and inferred meat mutagens with SSL risk and in comparison to risk of other polyps. Methods Meat, well-done meat, and inferred meat mutagen intakes were evaluated. Polytomous logistic regression models were used to estimate ORs and 95% CIs among cases (556 hyperplastic polyp, 1753 adenoma, and 208 SSL) and controls (3804) in the large colonoscopy-based, case-control study, the Tennessee Colorectal Polyp Study. Results The highest quartile intakes of red meat (OR: 2.38; 95% CI: 1.44, 3.93), processed meat (OR: 2.03; 95% CI: 1.30, 3.17), well-done red meat (OR: 2.19; 95% CI: 1.34, 3.60), and the HCA 2-amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo[4,5-f]quinoxaline (MeIQX; OR: 2.48; 95% CI: 1.49, 4.16) were associated with increased risk of SSLs in comparison to the lowest quartile intake. Conclusions High intakes of red and processed meats are strongly and especially associated with SSL risk and part of the association may be due to HCA intake. Future studies should evaluate other mechanism(s) and the potential for primary prevention.

Download Full-text

Towards refining WCRF/AICR cancer prevention recommendations for red and processed meat intake: Insights from Alberta’s Tomorrow Project cohort

British Journal Of Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s0007114521001240 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-38

Author(s):

Ala Al Rajabi ◽

Geraldine Lo Siou ◽

Alianu K. Akawung ◽

Kathryn L McDonald ◽

Tiffany R. Price ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cancer Prevention ◽

Proportional Hazards ◽

Red Meat ◽

Cox Proportional Hazards ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Carcinogenic Effect ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Red Meats ◽

Red And Processed Meat

ABSTRACT Current cancer prevention recommendations advise limiting red meat intake to <500g/week and avoiding consumption of processed meat, but do not differentiate the source of processed meat. We examined the associations of processed meat derived from red vs. non-red meats with cancer risk in a prospective cohort of 26,218 adults who reported dietary intake using the Canadian Diet History Questionnaire. Incidence of cancer was obtained through data linkage with Alberta Cancer Registry with median (IQR) follow-up of 13.3 (5.1) years. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were adjusted for covariates and stratified by age and gender. The median (IQR) consumption (g/week) of red meat, processed meat from red meat and processed meat from non-red meat were 267.9 (269.9), 53.6 (83.3), and 11.9 (31.8), respectively. High intakes (4th Quartile) of processed meat from red meat was associated with increased risk of gastro-intestinal cancer Adjusted Hazard Ratio (AHR) (95% CI): 1.68 (1.09 – 2.57) and colorectal cancers AHR (95% CI): 1.90 (1.12 – 3.22), respectively in women. No statistically significant associations were observed for intakes of red meat or processed meat from non-red meat. Results suggests that the carcinogenic effect associated with processed meat intake may be limited to processed meat derived from red meats. The findings provide preliminary evidence toward refining cancer prevention recommendations for red and processed meat intake.

Download Full-text

Meat intake and risk of diverticulitis among men

Gut ◽

10.1136/gutjnl-2016-313082 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 67 (3) ◽

pp. 466-472 ◽

Cited By ~ 38

Author(s):

Yin Cao ◽

Lisa L Strate ◽

Brieze R Keeley ◽

Idy Tam ◽

Kana Wu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Proportional Hazards ◽

Red Meat ◽

Cox Proportional Hazards ◽

Common Disease ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Relative Risks ◽

Cox Proportional Hazards Models ◽

Increased Risk

ObjectiveDiverticulitis is a common disease with a substantial clinical and economic burden. Besides dietary fibre, the role of other foods in the prevention of diverticulitis is underexplored.DesignWe prospectively examined the association between consumption of meat (total red meat, red unprocessed meat, red processed meat, poultry and fish) with risk of incident diverticulitis among 46 461 men enrolled in the Health Professionals Follow-Up Study (1986–2012). Cox proportional hazards models were used to compute relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs.ResultsDuring 651 970 person-years of follow-up, we documented 764 cases of incident diverticulitis. Compared with men in the lowest quintile (Q1) of total red meat consumption, men in the highest quintile (Q5) had a multivariable RR of 1.58 (95% CI 1.19 to 2.11; p for trend=0.01). The increase in risk was non-linear, plateauing after six servings per week (p for non-linearity=0.002). The association was stronger for unprocessed red meat (RR for Q5 vs Q1: 1.51; 95% CI 1.12 to 2.03; p for trend=0.03) than for processed red meat (RR for Q5 vs Q1: 1.03; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.35; p for trend=0.26). Higher consumption of poultry or fish was not associated with risk of diverticulitis. However, the substitution of poultry or fish for one serving of unprocessed red meat per day was associated with a decrease in risk of diverticulitis (multivariable RR 0.80; 95% CI 0.63 to 0.99).ConclusionsRed meat intake, particularly unprocessed red meat, was associated with an increased risk of diverticulitis. The findings provide practical dietary guidance for patients at risk of diverticulitis.

Download Full-text

Meat consumption and risk of ischemic heart disease and stroke: results from the UK Biobank

Proceedings of The Nutrition Society ◽

10.1017/s0029665120004024 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 79 (OCE2) ◽

Author(s):

Keren Papier ◽

Georgina Fensom ◽

Anika Knuppel ◽

Timothy Key ◽

Aurora Perez-Cornago

Keyword(s):

Meat Consumption ◽

Haemorrhagic Stroke ◽

Red Meat ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Uk Biobank ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Total Meat ◽

Red And Processed Meat

AbstractIntroductionMeat consumption may be associated with a higher risk of cardiovascular diseases, but the evidence remains inconclusive. We prospectively examined the association between meat (total meat, red and processed meat, red meat, processed meat and poultry) intake and risk of ischemic heart disease (IHD) and stroke, including ischemic and haemorrhagic subtypes, in a large British cohort.Materials and methodsData were from UK Biobank participants who were free of IHD, stroke and cancer at recruitment (2006–2010), with available information on meat intake in the baseline touchscreen survey, and linked hospital admissions and death data for IHD, stroke, and stroke subtypes over follow-up (n = 441,700). We used multivariable Cox proportional hazards models to assess associations between meat consumption and risk of IHD, total stroke and ischemic and haemorrhagic stroke subtypes.ResultsOver a mean of 8.1 years of follow-up, 13,590 incident cases of IHD, 5,441 cases of total stroke, 2,258, cases of ischaemic stroke, and 949 cases of haemorrhagic stroke occurred. The risk of IHD was positively associated with intakes of total meat (Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.18, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.09, 1.27 per 100 g/day higher intake), red and processed meat (HR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.08, 1.24 per 70 g/day higher intake), red meat (HR = 1.15, 95%, CI 1.07–1.24 per 50 g/day higher intake), processed meat (HR = 1.11, 95% CI 1.05, 1.16 per 20 g/day higher intake), and poultry (HR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.01, 1.13 per 30 g/day higher intake). The risk of total stroke was positively associated with intakes of total meat (HR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.02–1.29 per 100 g/day higher intake) and red and processed meat (HR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.03–1.27 per 70 g/day higher intake). Meat intake was not associated with ischaemic or haemorrhagic stroke.DiscussionThis large prospective study found that any meat consumption was associated with an increased risk of IHD and that red and processed meat consumption was associated with an increased risk of total stroke. Our findings for IHD and total stroke in relation to red and processed meat are in line with previous studies but our positive findings for poultry and IHD and null findings for red meat and ischaemic stroke are not, thus warranting further study.

Download Full-text

A Prospective Analysis of Red and Processed Meat Intake in Relation to Colorectal Cancer Incidence in the Black Women's Health Study

Current Developments in Nutrition ◽

10.1093/cdn/nzab036_030 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. 288-288

Author(s):

Ioanna Yiannakou ◽

Lauren E. Barber ◽

Shanshan Sheehy ◽

Julie R. Palmer ◽

Lynn Rosenberg ◽

...

Keyword(s):

African American ◽

African American Women ◽

Red Meat ◽

Health Study ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Processed Meats ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Red Meat Intake ◽

Red And Processed Meat

Abstract Objectives African Americans have the highest incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) of any racial/ethnic group in the US. High intake of red and processed meats has been shown to increase CRC risk in populations of European ancestry, but evidence in African American populations is limited. The association between saturated and monounsaturated fatty acid intakes, the primary types of fat in red and processed meat, and CRC is inconclusive. Thus, we prospectively assessed the intake of red and processed meats and dietary saturated and monounsaturated fatty acids in relation to CRC risk, utilizing the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS, 1995–2018). Methods Dietary data were derived from validated food frequency questionnaires completed in 1995 and 2001 by 52,695 BWHS participants. Multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression adjusted for energy, fiber, and discretionary fat. Results Over a median follow-up of 22 years, 564 women developed incident CRC. Total red meat intake was associated with a 25% increased risk of CRC per 100 g/day (HR = 1.25; 95% CI: 0.94–1.66), which was primarily due to intake of unprocessed red meat (HR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.05–1.70). Processed meat and total saturated and monounsaturated fatty acid intakes were not associated with an increased risk of CRC. Conclusions Unprocessed red meat intake was associated with an increased risk of CRC in this cohort of African American women. The strong evidence, now including African American women, that red meat plays a role in the etiology of CRC suggests opportunities for prevention. Funding Sources This research was funded by National Institutes of Health grants U01 CA164974 and R01 CA058420, the Karin Grunebaum Cancer Research Foundation, and the Boston University Peter Paul Career Development Professorship.

Download Full-text

Public perception of cancer risk.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2012.30.15_suppl.1559 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. 1559-1559

Author(s):

Lisa Burns ◽

Ursula Kenny ◽

Laura Healy ◽

Samantha Cushen ◽

Seamus O'Reilly ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Cancer Prevention ◽

Public Perception ◽

Food Irradiation ◽

Cooking Methods ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Cancer Risk Factors ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Risk Of Cancer

1559 Background: The public’s knowledge of cancer risk factors has rarely been studied in Ireland. An understanding of this can help inform cancer prevention programs. Methods: An online surveywas used to assess the public’s perception of cancer risk. Results: 525 people completed the survey. Mean age was 40yrs (range:18-74), 82% were female and 36% had college degrees. 81% were concerned about developing cancer, however 20% believed if cancer was in their family there was nothing they could do about personal cancer risk. 20% did not know that cancer risk increased with age, 27% believed that >50% of cancers are inherited, and 54% believed 10-20% of cancers are inherited. The top 5 risk factors listed by respondents were: smoking 85%, diet 74%, alcohol 44%, genetics 38%, and environment 31%. Only 32% were aware that obesity is a risk factor for cancer and 33% did not think the location of fat was important for cancer prevention. When given a list of potential behaviours relevant to cancer risk 33% believed wearing a tight bra and 49% believed a blow to the breast could increase cancer risk. 87% believed genetics ‘strongly’ increased risk, 85% stress, and 86% believed cell phones increased risk. 12% believed ‘luck’ was important in avoiding cancer, 35% thought ‘detox’ diets and 61% believed organic food reduced risk. Only 33% agreed with the statement that ‘frozen vegetables/fruit are as good as fresh’, 40% were unaware of the link between red meat and cancer. The following foods were thought to increase risk: cheese (29%), soy (9%), milk chocolate (30%), red wine (25%), and eggs (11%). Aerosol use (71%), cleaning agents (73%), smoking (99%), cooking methods (68%), processed meat (86%), food irradiation (77%), and genetically modified foods (81%) were believed to increased risk. The majority were aware that berries, green tea, garlic, brassica vegetables and physical activity of 30 minutes a day can reduce cancer risk. Conclusions: There is a sizable portion of the population who are misinformed about cancer risk. Most are aware of classic risk factors (e.g. smoking, poor diet). Many overestimate risk attributable to genetics, environment, stress, and underestimate age, obesity and sunlight. One in 5 believes lifetime risk of cancer is non-modifiable.

Download Full-text

Vegetarian diets, low-meat diets and health: a review

Public Health Nutrition ◽

10.1017/s1368980012000936 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 15 (12) ◽

pp. 2287-2294 ◽

Cited By ~ 133

Author(s):

Claire T McEvoy ◽

Norman Temple ◽

Jayne V Woodside

Keyword(s):

Type 2 Diabetes ◽

Health Status ◽

Dietary Patterns ◽

Health Benefits ◽

Red Meat ◽

Vulnerable Groups ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Vegetarian Diets

AbstractObjectiveTo review the epidemiological evidence for vegetarian diets, low-meat dietary patterns and their association with health status in adults.DesignPublished literature review focusing primarily on prospective studies and meta-analyses examining the association between vegetarian diets and health outcomes.ResultsBoth vegetarian diets and prudent diets allowing small amounts of red meat are associated with reduced risk of diseases, particularly CHD and type 2 diabetes. There is limited evidence of an association between vegetarian diets and cancer prevention. Evidence linking red meat intake, particularly processed meat, and increased risk of CHD, cancer and type 2 diabetes is convincing and provides indirect support for consumption of a plant-based diet.ConclusionsThe health benefits of vegetarian diets are not unique. Prudent plant-based dietary patterns which also allow small intakes of red meat, fish and dairy products have demonstrated significant improvements in health status as well. At this time an optimal dietary intake for health status is unknown. Plant-based diets contain a host of food and nutrients known to have independent health benefits. While vegetarian diets have not shown any adverse effects on health, restrictive and monotonous vegetarian diets may result in nutrient deficiencies with deleterious effects on health. For this reason, appropriate advice is important to ensure a vegetarian diet is nutritionally adequate especially for vulnerable groups.

Download Full-text

Meat intake and cancer risk: prospective analyses in UK Biobank

10.1101/19003822 ◽

2019 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Anika Knuppel ◽

Keren Papier ◽

Georgina K. Fensom ◽

Paul N. Appleby ◽

Julie A. Schmidt ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Prostate Cancer ◽

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Cancer Risk ◽

Meat Consumption ◽

Red Meat ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Uk Biobank ◽

Meat Intake ◽

Incidence Trends ◽

Red And Processed Meat

AbstractBackgroundRed and processed meat has been consistently associated with risk for colorectal cancer, but evidence for other cancer sites is limited and few studies have examined the association between poultry intake and cancer risk. We examined associations between total meat, red meat, processed meat and poultry intake and incidence for 20 common cancer sites.Methods and FindingsWe analysed data from 475,023 participants (54% women) in UK Biobank. Participants were aged 37-73 years and cancer free at baseline. Information on meat consumption was based on a touchscreen questionnaire completed at baseline covering type and frequency of meat intake. Diet intake was re-measured a minimum of three times in a subsample (15%) using a web-based 24h dietary recall questionnaire. Multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the association between baseline meat intake and cancer incidence. Trends in risk across baseline meat intake categories were calculated by assigning a mean value to each category using estimates from the re-measured meat intakes. During a mean follow-up of 6.9 years, 28,955 participants were diagnosed with a malignant cancer. Total, red and processed meat intakes were each positively associated with risk of colorectal cancer (e.g. hazard ratio (HR) per 70 g/day higher intake of red and processed meat combined 1.31, 95%-confidence interval (CI) 1.14-1.52).Red meat intake was positively associated with breast cancer (HR per 50 g/day higher intake 1.12, 1.01-1.24) and prostate cancer (1.15, 1.03-1.29). Poultry intake was positively associated with risk for cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues (HR per 30g/day higher intake 1.16, 1.03-1.32). Only the associations with colorectal cancer were robust to Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. Study limitations include unrepresentativeness of the study sample for the UK population, low case numbers for less common cancers and the possibility of residual confounding.ConclusionsHigher intakes of red and processed meat were associated with a higher risk of colorectal cancer. The observed positive associations of red meat consumption with breast and prostate cancer, and poultry intake with cancers of the lymphatic and hematopoietic tissues, require further investigation.

Download Full-text

Health Risks Associated with Meat Consumption: A Review of Epidemiological Studies

International Journal for Vitamin and Nutrition Research ◽

10.1024/0300-9831/a000224 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 85 (1-2) ◽

pp. 70-78 ◽

Cited By ~ 60

Author(s):

Evelyne Battaglia Richi ◽

Beatrice Baumer ◽

Beatrice Conrad ◽

Roger Darioli ◽

Alexandra Schmid ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Total Mortality ◽

The Elderly ◽

Epidemiological Studies ◽

Red Meat ◽

Processed Meat ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Meta Analyses ◽

Protein Supply

Abstract. Recent evidence from large prospective US and European cohort studies and from meta-analyses of epidemiological studies indicates that the long-term consumption of increasing amounts of red meat and particularly of processed meat is associated with an increased risk of total mortality, cardiovascular disease, colorectal cancer and type 2 diabetes, in both men and women. The association persists after inclusion of known confounding factors, such as age, race, BMI, history, smoking, blood pressure, lipids, physical activity and multiple nutritional parameters in multivariate analysis. The association has not always been noted with red meat, and it has been absent with white meat. There is evidence of several mechanisms for the observed adverse effects that might be involved, however, their individual role is not defined at present. It is concluded that recommendations for the consumption of unprocessed red meat and particularly of processed red meat should be more restrictive than existing recommendations. Restrictive recommendations should not be applied to subjects above about 70 years of age, as the studies quoted herein did not examine this age group, and the inclusion of sufficient protein supply (e. g. in the form of meat) is particularly important in the elderly.

Download Full-text