Abstract
Background
Iron can cause oxidative stress and DNA damage, and heme iron can catalyze endogenous formation of N-nitroso compounds, which are potent carcinogens. Dietary iron promotes esophageal cancer incidence in animal studies and has been identified as a growth factor for Helicobacter pylori, an established risk factor for stomach cancer.
Methods
We conducted a population-based case-control study of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus (n=124) and stomach (n=154) and 449 controls in Nebraska. Heme iron and total iron intake were estimated from a food-frequency questionnaire and databases of heme and total iron. We used logistic regression to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for known risk factors.
Results
Esophageal cancer was positively associated with higher intakes of heme iron (ORQ4 vs. Q1 =3.04, 95% CI 1.20–7.72; p-trend=0.009) and total iron from meat sources (ORQ4 vs. Q1 =2.67, 95% CI 0.99–7.16; p-trend=0.050). Risk of stomach cancer was elevated among those with higher intakes of heme iron (ORQ4vs.Q1=1.99, 95% CI 1.00–3.95, p-trend=0.17) and total iron from meat (OR=2.26, 95% CI 1.14–4.46; p-trend=0.11). Iron intake from all dietary sources was not significantly associated with risk of either cancer.
Conclusions
Our results suggest that high intakes of heme and iron from meat may be important dietary risk factors for esophageal and stomach cancer and may partly explain associations with red meat.
Keywords: Iron, heme iron, nutrition, esophageal cancer, stomach cancer
INTRODUCTION
The incidence of esophageal adenocarcinoma has risen rapidly in developed countries and the reasons for the increase are not well explained. Esophageal cancer predominantly afflicts males; however, the known risk factors, including obesity, reflux, and smoking cannot explain the strong male excess. Although the incidence of stomach cancer has decreased over the past 50 years in the United States and other Western countries(1), stomach cancer still ranks fourth in cancer incidence and second in mortality worldwide. Infection with Helicobacter pylori is an established risk factor for noncardia stomach cancer; however, only a small proportion of those infected go on to develop stomach cancer.(1)
Iron status is typically higher in males and animal models of esophageal cancer indicate that oxidative damage caused by a combination of gastro-esophageal reflux and high iron intake promotes tumorigenesis.(2) Iron may also play a role in stomach cancer risk by causing oxidative damage and it is thought to be an essential growth factor for H. pylori.(3) Another potential mechanism involves endogenous formation of carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds (NOC), which is increased after ingestion of heme iron(4) and red and processed meats(5), the primary sources of intake.
Only a few epidemiologic studies have estimated iron intake from meat and risk of esophageal or stomach cancer. An index for endogenously formed NOC was developed from human studies of iron intake from meats and was associated with an increased risk of stomach cancer in a European cohort study.(6) A cohort study in Iowa(7) found elevated incidence of esophageal and stomach cancer associated with high intake of heme iron but not total dietary iron.
We previously reported increased risks of esophageal and stomach adenocarcinomas associated with higher intake of red and processed meat, well-done red meat, and dietary nitrate and nitrite from animal sources.(8, 9) Here we estimate intake of heme and total iron from meat in relation to risk of these cancers using a new database of heme iron levels developed at the National Cancer Institute (NCI).
METHODS
Study population
We conducted a population-based case-control study of adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and stomach in 66 counties in eastern Nebraska as previously described.(8, 10) Cases were white men and women age 21 years or older, newly diagnosed between July 1, 1988, and June 30, 1993, identified from the Nebraska Cancer Registry and confirmed by histological review. Controls were randomly selected from a previous population-based case-control study in the same geographic region of Nebraska(11) and were matched to cases by race, age, gender, and vital status. We selected a random sample of previous controls with over-sampling of living controls to provide more power for analyses by respondent type. Of the 606 eligible controls, 503 (83%) were successfully interviewed for this study in 1992–1994. The response rate in the original study was 87%, giving an overall control response rate of 72%. Response rates were 88% and 79% for esophageal and stomach cancer cases, respectively. Telephone interviews were conducted with the subjects or their proxies for those who were deceased or too ill to participate. Proxy interviews were conducted for 76%, 80%, and 61% of esophageal and stomach cancer cases and controls, respectively. The majority (≥79%) of proxies were the spouse or child. The study was approved by Institutional Review Boards at NCI and University of Nebraska Medical Center.
Interviews and dietary database
Interviewers obtained information about dietary intakes, tobacco, alcohol, and other factors. We used the short Health Habits and History Questionnaire(12) with addition of foods high in nitrate/nitrite and questions about meat cooking methods and doneness preferences for beef, pork, and chicken.(8) The short questionnaire was developed from the full 100-item questionnaire after dropping questions that resulted in little reduction in nutrient intake correlations (correlations were ≥0.94 for macro- and micronutrients) (12). The full questionnaire contains foods that represented at least 90% of each of the 18 nutrients in the Second National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES II) database, including iron(13). Age- and gender-specific portion sizes and iron values came from the DIETSYS database(14) with nutrient values appropriate for the food supply in the 1980s. Iron intake from supplements was not obtained. Heme iron in meats was determined from a database developed at the National Cancer Institute, that was created from measured values of heme iron in meat samples (bacon, chicken, cold cuts, hamburgers, hot dogs, pork chops, roast beef, sausages, and steak) cooked by different methods to varying degrees of doneness.(15) The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) value for iron was used for liver (beef liver, pan fried).(16)
Data analysis
We limited analyses to those with adequate dietary data, defined as having fewer than 20% line items missing or unknown food items (124 esophageal and 154 stomach cancer cases, 449 controls). We investigated distal stomach cancer separately (excluding cardia cases, n=30 [19%]) and results were similar to those for all stomach cancers and are not presented. We evaluated quartiles of intake of heme and total iron based on the distribution among controls, as well as intake on the continuous scale. We evaluated processed, non-processed and total red meat intake on a grams per day basis simultaneously adjusting for white meat intake (chicken and fish). Previously, intake was evaluated in servings per week and was not adjusted for other meat types and macro- and micronutrients. We estimated odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using logistic regression, adjusting for the study matching factors of gender and year of birth, and risk factors for esophageal (smoking, alcohol, body mass index) and stomach cancer (education, smoking, alcohol) in this study population that changed the ORs more than 10%. Analyses were additionally adjusted for total calories and several nutrients associated with these cancers; (10) details are given in tables. We tested for trend across quartiles by including the median level of each quartile in the model as a continuous variable. Additional adjustment for animal nitrite/nitrate, saturated fat, or beef doneness preference did not change the ORs by ≥10% and, therefore, were not included as covariates in the final models. We evaluated risk separately for self and proxy respondents and observed similar associations so combined results are presented. We assessed effect modification by vitamin C and alcohol because vitamin C inhibits endogenous nitrosation and has other beneficial effects and alcohol influences iron homeostasis(17) and nitrosamine metabolism.(18, 19) To evaluate the consistency of the association, we stratified by gender, body mass index and smoking status.
RESULTS
In this population, intake of red meat (control median: 111 g/day, interquartile range [IQR]: 74–157) was about four-fold higher than intake of white meat (chicken and fish) (median: 24 g/day, IQR: 16–37). High intake of red meat was associated with increased risk of both esophageal and stomach cancer (highest vs. lowest quartile OR=2.85, 95% CI 1.00–8.16; p-trend=0.03; OR=2.16, 95% CI 1.06–4.38; p-trend=0.04, respectively) (Table 1). For stomach cancer, this association was primarily due to the intake of non-processed red meat.
Table 1.
Esophageala | Stomachb | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
g/day | controls | cases | OR | 95% CI | cases | OR | 95% CI | |
Total red meat | ||||||||
≤73.8 | 113 | 19 | 1.0 | 25 | 1.0 | |||
73.9–111.3 | 111 | 22 | 1.10 | (0.50–2.44) | 36 | 1.64 | (0.88–3.05) | |
111.4–157.2 | 113 | 36 | 1.44 | (0.63–3.28) | 44 | 1.95 | (1.03–3.70) | |
>157.2 | 112 | 47 | 2.85 | (1.00–8.16) | 49 | 2.16 | (1.06–4.38) | |
P-trend | 0.034 | 0.043 | ||||||
OR per 10 grams/day | 1.03 | (0.95–1.12) | 1.02 | (0.99–1.06) | ||||
Processed red meat | ||||||||
≤16.1 | 113 | 20 | 1.0 | 30 | 1.0 | |||
16.2–29.6 | 112 | 26 | 0.81 | (0.38–1.72) | 38 | 0.81 | (0.45–1.46) | |
29.7–52.3 | 111 | 31 | 1.07 | (0.52–2.21) | 40 | 1.17 | (0.66–2.10) | |
>52.3 | 113 | 47 | 1.40 | (0.62–3.15) | 46 | 0.97 | (0.51–1.85) | |
P-trend | 0.23 | 0.87 | ||||||
OR per 10 grams/day | 1.06 | (0.97–1.17) | 1.03 | (0.97–1.10) | ||||
Non-processed red meat | ||||||||
≤50.4 | 113 | 19 | 1.0 | 24 | 1.0 | |||
50.5–75.1 | 112 | 25 | 0.86 | (0.40–1.85) | 42 | 1.46 | (0.78–2.70) | |
75.2–111.2 | 112 | 33 | 1.82 | (0.84–3.93) | 35 | 1.90 | (1.03–3.51) | |
>111.2 | 112 | 47 | 1.92 | (0.73–5.06) | 53 | 1.94 | (1.00–3.76) | |
P-trend | 0.10 | 0.055 | ||||||
OR per 10 grams/day | 1.01 | (0.92–1.10) | 1.02 | (0.98–1.06) |
adjusted for year of birth, gender, cigarettes/day, (none, <30/day, 30+/day), quartiles of body mass index, continuous intake of retinoic acid, folate, riboflavin, zinc, carbohydrate, protein, total calories.
adjusted for year of birth, gender, cigarettes (never, <30/day, 30+/day), education (<high school, high school graduate, some college/vocational school; college graduate/post–graduate), vitamin C, fiber, carbohydrate, total calories.
All models are additionally adjusted for other meat to so that the variables in the model sum to total intake (red and white meats).
We observed an increased risk of esophageal cancer with increasing quartiles of heme and total iron from meat, with a stronger association for heme iron (highest vs. lowest quartile OR=3.04, 95% CI: 1.20–7.72 p-trend=0.01 (Table 2). Risk of stomach cancer was elevated about two-fold in all intake quartiles compared to the lowest for both heme and total iron from meat. Iron intake from all dietary sources was not significantly associated with risk of either cancer. Adjustment of the models for animal sources of nitrite did not change the ORs (not shown). The association of esophageal and stomach cancer with heme and total iron from meat was similar among those with below the median (<114.7 mg/day) and above the median (>=114.7 mg/day) intake of vitamin C. Stratification by alcohol consumption was limited by small numbers of non-drinkers among cases (26 esophageal, 66 stomach). Among consumers of alcohol (past or current), we observed significant positive trends with intake of heme iron for esophageal and stomach cancers (p-trend=0.02 and <0.001, respectively) and total iron from meat (p-trend=0.03 and 0.01, respectively). Among nondrinkers, ORs for esophageal cancer were nonsignificantly elevated among those with high intake of heme and meat iron; however, we observed no association for stomach cancer (not shown).
Table 2.
Esophageala | Stomachb | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
controls | cases | OR | 95% CI | cases | OR | 95% CI | |
Heme iron (mcg/day) | |||||||
98-<660 | 112 | 19 | 1.0 | 21 | 1.0 | ||
660-<1038 | 112 | 26 | 1.20 | (0.56–2.55) | 40 | 2.15 | (1.15–4.02) |
1038-<1440 | 112 | 35 | 1.89 | (0.88–4.08) | 47 | 2.38 | (1.26–4.52) |
1440+ | 113 | 44 | 3.04 | (1.20–7.72) | 46 | 1.99 | (1.00–3.95) |
P–trend | 0.01 | 0.17 | |||||
OR per mg/day | 1.25 | (0.70–2.23) | 1.24 | (0.97–1.58) | |||
Meat iron (mcg/day) | |||||||
589-<2489 | 113 | 19 | 1.0 | 23 | 1.0 | ||
2489-<3802 | 112 | 29 | 1.38 | (0.66–2.90) | 44 | 2.32 | (1.26–4.25) |
3802-<5309 | 112 | 32 | 1.64 | (0.74–3.61) | 37 | 1.66 | (0.87–3.15) |
5309+ | 112 | 44 | 2.67 | (0.99–7.16) | 50 | 2.26 | (1.14–4.46) |
P–trend | 0.05 | 0.11 | |||||
OR per mg/day | 1.07 | (0.86–1.34) | 1.06 | (0.98–1.16) | |||
Total iron (mg/day) | |||||||
<10.6 | 113 | 26 | 1.0 | 29 | 1.0 | ||
10.6-<13.4 | 112 | 24 | 0.73 | (0.35–1.53) | 31 | 1.24 | (0.66–2.32) |
13.4-<17.3 | 112 | 39 | 1.40 | (0.62–3.20) | 49 | 1.67 | (0.87–3.18) |
17.3+ | 112 | 35 | 1.67 | (0.51–5.44) | 45 | 1.71 | (0.75–3.18) |
P-trend | 0.31 | 0.21 | |||||
OR per mg/day | 1.03 | (0.91–1.19) | 1.03 | (0.98–1.08) |
adjusted for year of birth, gender, cigarettes/day, (none, <30/day, 30+/day), quartiles of body mass index, continuous intake of retinoic acid, folate, riboflavin, zinc, carbohydrate, protein, total calories.
adjusted for year of birth, gender, cigarettes (never, <30/day, 30+/day), education (<high school, high school graduate, some college/vocational school; college graduate/post–graduate), vitamin C, fiber, carbohydrate, total calories.
All models are additionally adjusted for other meat to so that the variables in the model sum to total intake (red and white meats).
DISCUSSION
We previously reported that high red meat intake and animal sources of nitrate and nitrite were associated with increased risk of esophageal and stomach cancers.(8, 9) Here, we report risk for grams of daily red and processed meat intake adjusted for total meat intake and micronutrients. For both esophageal and stomach cancer, we observed significantly increased risk with high intake of red meat. High intake of heme and meat iron were associated with increased risk of esophageal and stomach cancers; whereas, iron intake from all foods was not associated with risk of these cancers.
Most previous case-control studies observed a positive association between red meat intake and risk of esophageal and stomach cancers; whereas, cohort studies are less consistent. (20–23) Few studies have investigated potential mechanisms for these associations.
Several prior studies evaluated heme or meat iron and risk of these cancers. In a Danish cohort study, esophageal cancer was more common than expected in patients with hemochromatosis, a condition associated with iron overload.(24) A cohort study of older women in Iowa(7) found a positive trend in risk of upper aerodigestive cancer (esophageal and stomach cancers) with increasing heme iron intake. Risks were similar among nondrinkers and drinkers, although stomach and esophageal cancers were not evaluated separately. In an analysis of heme iron intake in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study cohort,(20) using the same database, heme iron was positively associated with esophageal adenocarcinoma (highest versus lowest quartile HR = 1.47, 95 % CI: 0.99 – 2.20, P for trend = 0.063). A case-control study in Ireland(25) found a 3-fold risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma among those in the highest quartile of heme iron intake. The distribution of intake and the magnitude of the association were very similar to our study. However, in contrast to our findings, total dietary iron was associated with decreased risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma and toenail iron levels showed a similar inverse association with risk. A case-control study of esophageal cancer in the United States(26) found that higher concentrations of iron measured in nails were associated with increased risk of esophageal cancer; however, the authors did not evaluate esophageal tumors by histology.
Heme iron intake was not associated with stomach cancer risk in the NIH-AARP cohort.(20) In contrast, a cohort study in Europe(6) evaluated iron intake from meat as a marker of endogenous nitrosation and found a significantly increased risk of stomach cancer with increased intake. In a nested case-control study within this cohort, the positive association with endogenous NOC as estimated by meat iron was present only among individuals infected with H. pylori (>90% of cases) and those with plasma vitamin C levels below the median. We observed similar associations between meat and heme iron and stomach cancer risk by the median vitamin C intake level estimated from the food frequency questionnaire. Differences in our findings may be due to the different methods used to estimate vitamin C intake. We did not have information on H. pylori infection on the entire study population, but infection rates were high (>70%) based on 100 controls (unpublished data).
Ingestion of nitrate and nitrite from processed meats is associated with increased risk of esophageal and stomach cancers in most case-control studies.(27) We previously reported a significant positive trend in risk of esophageal cancer with higher intake of animal sources of nitrite and nitrate;(9) however, our findings for heme and meat iron intake were not altered by adjustment for nitrate/nitrite or for meat doneness levels.
A potential mechanism whereby meat iron may increase risk has been demonstrated in rodent models using surgically-induced reflux, in which high dose intraperitoneal iron induced esophageal tumors.(28) Heme iron has cytotoxic and hyperproliferative effects in the rat colon(29) and may act similarly in the specialized intestinal epithelium of Barrett’s esophagus, which is associated with esophageal adenocarcinoma. Iron is thought to be important growth factor for H. pylori(3) and infection is an established risk factor for stomach cancer. Heme iron also increases endogenous formation of NOC(4, 5), which cause esophageal and stomach tumors in several animal species.(30)
Our study was limited by a lack of information on H. pylori infection and a limited sample size for evaluating risks among subgroups. Some of the data was collected from proxy respondents, which may have resulted in some degree of measurement error; however, if non-differential, the effect would be to attenuate risk estimates. However, we observed similar intake levels and consistent associations by respondent type suggesting that proxy reporting of meat intake was similar to self-reports. The strengths of our study include the high response rates, information on important risk factors for these cancers, detailed dietary information, and a database of heme iron levels that accounted for varying levels in meats cooked by various methods and to different doneness preferences. We were also able to adjust for nitrate and nitrite levels in meats.
Our findings suggest that heme iron from red meat is a risk factor for adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and stomach. Larger and prospective studies are needed to confirm these associations and to evaluate effect modification by factors affecting iron homeostatsis and endogenous NOC production.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank Robert Saal, Casey Boudreau and Carol Russell for assistance in study management and coordination; Monica Seeland and other staff of the Nebraska Cancer Registry for providing data; study interviewers and support staff for their diligent work and the many physicians and study participants who cooperated in this study.
Funding: This research was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Cancer Institute.
Footnotes
Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
Conflict of interest: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Reference List
- 1.Shibata A, Parsonnet J. Stomach Cancer. In: Schottenfeld DFJ Jr, editor. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention. 3rd ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Chen X, Yang CS. Esophageal adenocarcinoma: a review and perspectives on the mechanism of carcinogenesis and chemoprevention. Carcinogenesis. 2001 Aug;22(8):1119–1129. doi: 10.1093/carcin/22.8.1119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Perez-Perez GI, Israel DA. Role of iron in Helicobacter pylori: its influence in outer membrane protein expression and in pathogenicity. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2000 Dec;12(12):1263–1265. doi: 10.1097/00042737-200012120-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Cross AJ, Pollock JR, Bingham SA. Haem, not protein or inorganic iron, is responsible for endogenous intestinal N-nitrosation arising from red meat. Cancer Res. 2003 May 15;63(10):2358–2360. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Lunn JC, Kuhnle G, Mai V, et al. The effect of haem in red and processed meat on the endogenous formation of N-nitroso compounds in the upper gastrointestinal tract. Carcinogenesis. 2007 Mar;28(3):685–690. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgl192. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Jakszyn P, Bingham S, Pera G, et al. Endogenous versus exogenous exposure to N-nitroso compounds and gastric cancer risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC-EURGAST) study. Carcinogenesis. 2006 Jul;27(7):1497–1501. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgl019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Lee DH, Anderson KE, Folsom AR, Jacobs DR., Jr Heme iron, zinc and upper digestive tract cancer: the Iowa Women's Health Study. Int J Cancer. 2005 Nov 20;117(4):643–647. doi: 10.1002/ijc.21215. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Ward MH, Sinha R, Heineman EF, et al. Risk of adenocarcinoma of the stomach and esophagus with meat cooking method and doneness preference. Int J Cancer. 1997 Mar 28;71(1):14–19. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19970328)71:1<14::aid-ijc4>3.0.co;2-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Ward MH, Heineman EF, Markin RS, Weisenburger DD. Adenocarcinoma of the stomach and esophagus and drinking water and dietary sources of nitrate and nitrite. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2008 Jul;14(3):193–197. doi: 10.1179/oeh.2008.14.3.193. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Chen H, Tucker KL, Graubard BI, et al. Nutrient intakes and adenocarcinoma of the esophagus and distal stomach. Nutr Cancer. 2002;42(1):33–40. doi: 10.1207/S15327914NC421_5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Zahm SH, Weisenburger DD, Babbitt PA, et al. A case-control study of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and the herbicide 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) in eastern Nebraska. Epidemiology. 1990 Sep;1(5):349–356. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199009000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Block G, Hartman AM, Naughton D. A reduced dietary questionnaire: development and validation. Epidemiology. 1990 Jan;1(1):58–64. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199001000-00013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Block G, Dresser CM, Hartman AM, Carroll MD. Nutrient sources in the American diet: quantitative data from the NHANES II survey. I. Vitamins and minerals. Am J Epidemiol. 1985 Jul;122(1):13–26. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a114072. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.HHHQ-DIETSYS Analysis Software [computer program]. Version 3.0. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute; 1993. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Sinha R, Cross A, Curtin J, et al. Development of a food frequency questionnaire module and databases for compounds in cooked and processed meats. Mol Nutr Food Res. 2005 Jul;49(7):648–655. doi: 10.1002/mnfr.200500018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference, Release 21. [computer program]. Version Release 21. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service; 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Fletcher LM, Halliday JW, Powell LW. Interrelationships of alcohol and iron in liver disease with particular reference to the iron-binding proteins, ferritin and transferrin. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 1999 Mar;14(3):202–214. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-1746.1999.01836.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Anderson LM, Chhabra SK, Nerurkar PV, Souliotis VL, Kyrtopoulos SA. Alcohol-related cancer risk: a toxicokinetic hypothesis. Alcohol. 1995 Mar;12(2):97–104. doi: 10.1016/0741-8329(94)00089-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Anderson LM, Souliotis VL, Chhabra SK, Moskal TJ, Harbaugh SD, Kyrtopoulos SA. N-nitrosodimethylamine-derived O(6)-methylguanine in DNA of monkey gastrointestinal and urogenital organs and enhancement by ethanol. Int J Cancer. 1996 Mar 28;66(1):130–134. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19960328)66:1<130::AID-IJC22>3.0.CO;2-G. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Cross AJ, Freedman ND, Ren J, et al. Meat Consumption and Risk of Esophageal and Gastric Cancer in a Large Prospective Study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2010 Oct 26; doi: 10.1038/ajg.2010.415. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Gonzalez CA, Jakszyn P, Pera G, et al. Meat intake and risk of stomach and esophageal adenocarcinoma within the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006 Mar 1;98(5):345–354. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj071. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Jakszyn P, Gonzalez CA. Nitrosamine and related food intake and gastric and oesophageal cancer risk: a systematic review of the epidemiological evidence. World J Gastroenterol. 2006 Jul 21;12(27):4296–4303. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v12.i27.4296. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research. Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. Washington DC: AICR; 2007. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Hsing AW, McLaughlin JK, Olsen JH, Mellemkjar L, Wacholder S, Fraumeni JF., Jr Cancer risk following primary hemochromatosis: a population-based cohort study in Denmark. Int J Cancer. 1995 Jan 17;60(2):160–162. doi: 10.1002/ijc.2910600204. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.O'Doherty MG, Abnet CC, Murray LJ, et al. Iron intake and markers of iron status and risk of Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma. Cancer Causes Control. 2010 Dec;21(12):2269–2279. doi: 10.1007/s10552-010-9652-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Rogers MA, Thomas DB, Davis S, Vaughan TL, Nevissi AE. A case-control study of element levels and cancer of the upper aerodigestive tract. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1993 Jul;2(4):305–312. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.International Agency for Research on Cancer. Ingested nitrates and nitrites, and some cyanobacterial peptide toxins. Lyon: IARC; 2007. [Google Scholar]
- 28.Chen X, Yang CS. Esophageal adenocarcinoma: a review and perspectives on the mechanism of carcinogenesis and chemoprevention. Carcinogenesis. 2001 Aug;22(8):1119–1129. doi: 10.1093/carcin/22.8.1119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Sesink AL, Termont DS, Kleibeuker JH, Van der MR. Red meat and colon cancer: the cytotoxic and hyperproliferative effects of dietary heme. Cancer Res. 1999 Nov 15;59(22):5704–5709. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Mirvish SS. Role of N-nitroso compounds (NOC) and N-nitrosation in etiology of gastric, esophageal, nasopharyngeal and bladder cancer and contribution to cancer of known exposures to NOC. Cancer Lett. 1995 Jun 29;93(1):17–48. doi: 10.1016/0304-3835(95)03786-V. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]