IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/0040325.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Prospective Study of Red and Processed Meat Intake in Relation to Cancer Risk

Author

Listed:
  • Amanda J Cross
  • Michael F Leitzmann
  • Mitchell H Gail
  • Albert R Hollenbeck
  • Arthur Schatzkin
  • Rashmi Sinha

Abstract

Background: Red meat and processed meat have been associated with carcinogenesis at several anatomic sites, but no prospective study has examined meat intake in relation to a range of malignancies. We investigated whether red or processed meat intake increases cancer risk at a variety of sites. Methods and Findings: The National Institutes of Health (NIH)-AARP (formerly the American Association for Retired Persons) Diet and Health Study is a cohort of approximately 500,000 people aged 50–71 y at baseline (1995–1996). Meat intake was estimated from a food frequency questionnaire administered at baseline. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals within quintiles of red and processed meat intake. During up to 8.2 y of follow-up, 53,396 incident cancers were ascertained. Statistically significant elevated risks (ranging from 20% to 60%) were evident for esophageal, colorectal, liver, and lung cancer, comparing individuals in the highest with those in the lowest quintile of red meat intake. Furthermore, individuals in the highest quintile of processed meat intake had a 20% elevated risk for colorectal and a 16% elevated risk for lung cancer. Conclusions: Both red and processed meat intakes were positively associated with cancers of the colorectum and lung; furthermore, red meat intake was associated with an elevated risk for cancers of the esophagus and liver. Using data from a large cohort study, Amanda Cross and colleagues found that both red and processed meat intakes were positively associated with cancers of the colorectum and lung. Background.: Every year, there are more than 10 million new cases of cancer around the world. These cases are not spread evenly across the globe. The annual incidence of cancer (the number of new cases divided by the population size) and the type of cancer most commonly diagnosed varies widely among countries. Much of the global variation in cancer incidence and type is thought to be due to environmental influences. These include exposure to agents in the air or water that cause cancer, and lifestyle factors such as smoking and diet. Researchers identify environmental factors that affect cancer risk by measuring the exposure of a large number of individuals to a specific environmental factor and then monitoring these people for several years to see who develops cancer. The hope is that by identifying the environmental factors that cause or prevent cancer, the global burden of cancer can be reduced. Why Was This Study Done?: Diet is thought to influence the incidence of several cancers but it is very difficult to unravel which aspects of diet are important. Being overweight, for example, is strongly associated with an increased risk of developing several types of cancer, but the evidence that the intake of red meat (beef, pork, and lamb) and of processed meat (for example, bacon, ham, and sausages) is linked to cancer risk is much weaker. Although several studies have linked a high intake of red meat and processed meat to an increased risk of colorectal cancer (the colon is the large bowel; the rectum is the final few inches of the large bowel before the anus), whether this aspect of diet affects the risk of other types of cancer is unclear. In this prospective study, the researchers have examined the association between meat intake and the incidence of a wide range of cancers. What Did the Researchers Do and Find?: In 1995–1996, nearly half a million US men and women aged 50–71 y joined the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. The participants in this study—none of whom had had cancer previously—completed a questionnaire about their dietary habits over the previous year and provided other personal information such as their age, weight, and smoking history. The researchers used these data and information from state cancer registries to look for associations between the intake of red and processed meat and the incidence of various cancers. They found that people whose red meat intake was in the top fifth of the range of intakes recorded in the study (the highest quintile of consumption) had an increased risk of developing colorectal, liver, lung, and esophageal cancer when compared with people in the lowest quintile of consumption. People in the highest quintile of processed meat intake had an increased risk of developing colorectal and lung cancer. The incidences of other cancers were largely unaffected by meat intake. What Do These Findings Mean?: These findings provide strong evidence that people who eat a lot of red and processed meats have greater risk of developing colorectal and lung cancer than do people who eat small quantities. They also indicate that a high red meat intake is associated with an increased risk of esophageal and liver cancer, and that one in ten colorectal and one in ten lung cancers could be avoided if people reduced their red and processed meat intake to the lowest quintile. However, although the researchers allowed for factors such as smoking history that might have affected cancer incidences, some of the effects they ascribe to meat intake might be caused by other lifestyle factors. Furthermore, because the study's definitions of red meat and processed meat overlapped—bacon and ham, for example, were included in both categories—exactly which type of meat is related to cancer remains unclear. Finally, most of the study participants were non-Hispanic white, so these findings may not apply to people with different genetic backgrounds. Nevertheless, they add to the evidence that suggests that decreased consumption of red and processed meats could reduce the incidence of several types of cancer. Additional Information.: Please access these Web sites via the online version of this summary at http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040325.

Suggested Citation

  • Amanda J Cross & Michael F Leitzmann & Mitchell H Gail & Albert R Hollenbeck & Arthur Schatzkin & Rashmi Sinha, 2007. "A Prospective Study of Red and Processed Meat Intake in Relation to Cancer Risk," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(12), pages 1-12, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:0040325
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040325
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040325
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0040325&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040325?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick, D.L. & Cheadle, A. & Thompson, D.C. & Diehr, P. & Koepsell, T. & Kinne, S., 1994. "The validity of self-reported smoking: A review and meta-analysis," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 84(7), pages 1086-1093.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jeanine M Genkinger & Anita Koushik, 2007. "Meat Consumption and Cancer Risk," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(12), pages 1-4, December.
    2. Junfeng Zhang & Zhen Zhan & Juan Wu & Chunbing Zhang & Yaping Yang & Shujuan Tong & Zheng Sun & Lei Qin & Xuewen Yang & Wei Dong, 2013. "Association among Polymorphisms in EGFR Gene Exons, Lifestyle and Risk of Gastric Cancer with Gender Differences in Chinese Han Subjects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-12, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Frank Stafford, 2009. "Emerging Modes of Timeline Data Collection: Event History Calendar Time Diary and Methods," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 93(1), pages 69-76, August.
    2. DeCicca, Philip & Kenkel, Don & Mathios, Alan, 2008. "Cigarette taxes and the transition from youth to adult smoking: Smoking initiation, cessation, and participation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 904-917, July.
    3. Ana Balsa & Carlos Díaz, 2018. "Social interactions in health behaviors and conditions," Documentos de Trabajo/Working Papers 1802, Facultad de Ciencias Empresariales y Economia. Universidad de Montevideo..
    4. Muxing Xie & Chunrong Jia & Yawei Zhang & Beibei Wang & Ning Qin & Suzhen Cao & Liyun Zhao & Dongmei Yu & Xiaoli Duan, 2020. "Household Exposure to Secondhand Smoke among Chinese Children: Status, Determinants, and Co-Exposures," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-12, July.
    5. Nakata, Akinori & Ikeda, Tomoko & Takahashi, Masaya & Haratani, Takashi & Hojou, Minoru & Fujioka, Yosei & Araki, Shunichi, 2006. "Non-fatal occupational injury among active and passive smokers in small- and medium-scale manufacturing enterprises in Japan," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 63(9), pages 2452-2463, November.
    6. Mariliis Põld & Kersti Pärna, 2020. "Nicotine Dependence and Factors Related to Smoking Cessation among Physicians in Estonia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-10, May.
    7. James Langenbucher & Jeffrey Merrill, 2001. "The Validity of Self-Reported Cost Events by Substance Abusers," Evaluation Review, , vol. 25(2), pages 184-210, April.
    8. Jun, Hee-Jin & Acevedo-Garcia, Dolores, 2007. "The effect of single motherhood on smoking by socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(4), pages 653-666, August.
    9. Fred Pampel & Justin Denney, 2011. "Cross-National Sources of Health Inequality: Education and Tobacco Use in the World Health Survey," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 48(2), pages 653-674, May.
    10. Jesse D. Raffa & Joel A. Dubin, 2015. "Multivariate longitudinal data analysis with mixed effects hidden Markov models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 71(3), pages 821-831, September.
    11. DeCicca, Philip & Kenkel, Donald & Liu, Feng, 2013. "Excise tax avoidance: The case of state cigarette taxes," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 1130-1141.
    12. Adrianna Bella & Temesgen Kifle & Kam Ki Tang, 2021. "Smoke gets in your shape: The effects of smoking on body weight in Indonesia," Discussion Papers Series 646, School of Economics, University of Queensland, Australia.
    13. Qing Wang & Jay J Shen & Michelle Sotero & Casey A Li & Zhiyuan Hou, 2018. "Income, occupation and education: Are they related to smoking behaviors in China?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-17, February.
    14. Erik Nesson, 2017. "The Impact of Tobacco Control Policies on Adolescent Smoking: Comparing Self-Reports and Biomarkers," American Journal of Health Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 3(4), pages 507-527, Fall.
    15. Rosemary Avery & Donald Kenkel & Dean R. Lillard & Alan Mathios, 2007. "Private Profits and Public Health: Does Advertising of Smoking Cessation Products Encourage Smokers to Quit?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 115(3), pages 447-481.
    16. Alys Havard & Louisa R Jorm & Sanja Lujic, 2014. "Risk Adjustment for Smoking Identified through Tobacco Use Diagnoses in Hospital Data: A Validation Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(4), pages 1-9, April.
    17. Amy Bergenwall & E. Kelloway & Julian Barling, 2014. "Odd Jobs, Bad Habits, and Ethical Implications: Smoking-Related Outcomes of Children’s Early Employment Intensity," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 122(2), pages 269-282, June.
    18. Keyes, Katherine M. & Vo, Thomas & Wall, Melanie M. & Caetano, Raul & Suglia, Shakira F. & Martins, Silvia S. & Galea, Sandro & Hasin, Deborah, 2015. "Racial/ethnic differences in use of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana: Is there a cross-over from adolescence to adulthood?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 132-141.
    19. Michelle DiGiacomo & Patricia M. Davidson & Penelope A. Abbott & Joyce Davison & Louise Moore & Sandra C. Thompson, 2011. "Smoking Cessation in Indigenous Populations of Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the United States: Elements of Effective Interventions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-23, January.
    20. Donald Kenkel & Dean Lillard & Alan Mathios, 2006. "The Roles of High School Completion and GED Receipt in Smoking and Obesity," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(3), pages 635-660, July.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:0040325. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.