Skip to main content
The Journal of International Medical Research logoLink to The Journal of International Medical Research
. 2018 Aug 24;46(10):3995–4005. doi: 10.1177/0300060518792801

Association between dietary fiber intake and risk of ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies

Xiumin Huang 1,, Xuelian Wang 1, Jing Shang 1, Yanzhen Lin 1, Ying Yang 1, Youyi Song 1, Shengnan Yu 1
PMCID: PMC6166337  PMID: 30141692

Short abstract

Objective

To evaluate the associations between dietary fiber intake and ovarian cancer risk.

Methods

A literature survey was conducted by searching the PubMed, Web of Science, and Wanfang Med Online databases up to March 1st, 2018. The effect of dietary fiber intake on ovarian cancer risk was evaluated by calculating relative risks with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) using Stata 12.0 software.

Results

A total of 17 articles with 149,177 participants including 7609 ovarian cancer patients were included in this analysis. The summarized relative risk for ovarian cancer in participants with the highest compared with the lowest fiber intake was 0.760 (95%CI=0.702–0.823), with no significant between-study heterogeneity (I2=12.4%). Subgroup analysis according to study design demonstrated positive associations in both cohort studies and case-control studies. Moreover, the results were consistent among populations from America, Europe, and Asia. No publication bias was found by Egger’s test or funnel plots.

Conclusion

This meta-analysis concluded that a high intake of dietary fiber could significantly reduce the risk of ovarian cancer compared with a low fiber intake.

Keywords: Diet, fiber intake, ovarian cancer, meta-analysis, cancer risk, observational studies

Introduction

Ovarian cancer is the leading cause of death from gynecological cancers worldwide. It often remains undiagnosed until a late stage, by which time it may have spread throughout the abdominal cavity.1,2 There were an estimated 22,240 new cases of ovarian cancer and 14,030 new deaths in 2013.3 Despite continuous advances in ovarian cancer research and in its diagnosis and clinical treatment during the past 30 years, a cost-effective screening strategy that could significantly increase the survival rate of patients with early-stage ovarian cancer remains elusive.4 Furthermore, although the disease has a major impact on public health, its etiology is still poorly understood.

A previous review that explored the association between dietary intake and ovarian cancer risk5 found no relationship between ovarian cancer and dietary fiber intake. However, the authors only included one study on the effects of dietary fiber intake on ovarian cancer risk, though numerous observational studies assessing this association have now been published. Nevertheless, the effect of dietary fiber intake on ovarian cancer risk remains controversial. To address this question, we performed a comprehensive meta-analysis to reflect the current evidence on the subject.

Materials and methods

Publication search

We identified potentially eligible articles by performing a comprehensive literature search of Web of Science, PubMed, and Wanfang Med Online, up to March 1st, 2018, using the following keywords: ‘fiber’ OR ‘nutrient’ OR ‘carbohydrates’ AND ‘ovarian cancer’ OR ‘ovarian tumor’. We also examined the relevant references to acquire the most comprehensive studies. Two investigators searched the databases independently, and any disagreements between the two investigators were resolved by discussion.

Inclusion criteria

The inclusion criteria for studies in this meta-analysis were: (1) observational studies; (2) studies investigating the association between dietary fiber intake and risk of ovarian cancer; (3) reported odds ratio (OR) or relative risk (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI); (4) studies on humans; and (5) studies published in English or Chinese.

Data extraction

Two investigators screened the potentially relevant studies and extracted the following data: first author’s name; publication year; geographic areas; source of controls, cases, and participants; fiber type; mean age or age range; RR with 95%CI for the association between dietary fiber intake and risk of ovarian cancer; adjustment for covariates. Different data from the two investigators were discussed to reach an agreement.

Statistical analysis

The RR (95%CI) of ovarian cancer between the highest level of dietary fiber intake compared with the lowest level in each study was generated.6 Heterogeneity was evaluated with the I2 statistic,7 and defined as low (I2<25%), moderate (I2=25%–50%), or high (I2>50%).8 The analysis was carried out using a random effects model. Sensitivity analysis was used to evaluate the potential effects of individual studies on the overall results, by removing one study at a time. Potential publication bias was examined by Egger’s test9 and Begg’s funnel plots.10 All statistical analyses were carried out using Stata version 12 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA), and a P-value <0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Research characteristics

A total of 2784 publications were identified that assessed the relationship between dietary fiber intake and ovarian cancer. We first reviewed the titles and abstracts for each retrieved document, and read the full articles if it was not possible to judge the eligibility of the article from the title or abstract. A total of 17 studies1127 met our inclusion criteria and were analyzed in this study. The publication years of the included studies ranged from 1983 to 2017. The detailed screening process is shown as a flow chart in Figure 1. Finally, 149,177 participants including 7609 ovarian cancer patients were included in the current study. Four studies were cohort studies and the remaining 13 were case-control studies. Ten studies were from the United States, four from Europe, and three from Asia. The main characteristics of the 17 articles are listed in Table 1.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Study selection process for this meta-analysis.

Table 1.

Characteristics of the included studies examining the association between dietary fiber intake and ovarian cancer risk.

Study, year [reference] Design Age (yr) Participants, cases Country Fiber type OR/RR (95%CI) highest vs. lowest Adjustment
Byers et al., 1983 [11] HCC 30–79 1034, 274 United States Total fiber OR=0.77 (0.56–1.98) Adjusted for age
Edefonti et al., 2008 [12] HCC 18–79 4444, 1031 Italy Total fiber OR=0.77 (0.61–0.98) Adjusted for age, education, parity, menopausal status, geographic area, BMI, history of female cancers, history of digestive cancers, energy intake
Hedelin et al., 2011 [23] Cohort 30–49 47,140, 163 Sweden Total fiberCereal fiberVegetable fiber RR=0.82 (0.50–1.35) RR=1.17 (0.74–1.87) RR=1.02 (0.63–1.64) Adjusted for age, oral contraceptives, age at menarche, parity, hormone replacement therapy, total energy intake, intake of alcohol, saturated fat, meat, and fish
Kushi et al., 1999 [24] Cohort 55–69 29,083, 139 United States Total fiber RR=1.01 (0.61–1.68) Adjusted for age, total energy intake, number of live births, age at menopause, family history of ovarian cancer in a first-degree relative, hysterectomy/unilateral oophorectomy status, waist-to-hip ratio, level of physical activity, cigarette smoking (number of pack-years), and educational level
McCann et al., 2001 [13] HCC 20–87 1921, 496 United States Total fiber OR=0.57 (0.38–0.87) Adjusted for age, education, region of residence, regularity of menstruation, family history of ovarian cancer, parity, age at menarche, oral contraceptive use, and total energy intake
McCann et al., 2003 [14] PCC 40–85 820, 124 United States Total fiber OR=0.43 (0.20–0.94) Adjusted for age, education, total months menstruating, difficulty becoming pregnant, oral contraceptive use (ever/never), menopausal status, and total energy
Nagle et al., 2011 [15] PCC 18–79 2780, 1366 Australia Total fiber OR=0.78 (0.62–0.98) Adjusted for age, oral contraceptive use, level of post-school education parity, BMI, menopausal status, and energy intake
Pan et al., 2004 [16] PCC 20–76 2577, 442 Canada Total fiber OR=0.91 (0.66–1.25) Adjusted for 10-year age group, province of residence, education, alcohol consumption, cigarette pack-years, BMI, total caloric intake, recreational physical activity, number of live births, menstruation years, and menopause status
Pelucchi et al., 2001 [17] HCC 18–79 3442, 1031 Italy Total fiberInsoluble fiberVegetable fiberFruit fiberCereal fiber OR=0.68 (0.53–0.88) OR=0.70 (0.54–0.89) OR=0.59 (0.46–0.77) OR=0.96 (0.75–1.22) OR=1.32 (1.03–1.71) Adjusted for age, center, education, occupational physical activity, parity, oral contraceptive use, family history of ovarian and/or breast cancer in first-degree relatives, menopausal status, and total energy intake
Playdon et al., 2017 [25] Cohort 18–79 1709, 811 Australia Total fiber RR=0.69 (0.53–0.9) Adjusted for age at diagnosis, International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) stage, amount of residual disease, grade, tumor subtype, smoking status, BMI, physical activity index, and daily caloric intake
Qin et al., 2016 [18] PCC 20–79 1015, 406 United States Total fiber OR=0.79 (0.53–1.17) Adjusted for age, education, region, total energy intake, parity, oral contraceptive use, menopause status, tubal ligation, and family history of breast/ovarian cancer (first-degree relative); for added sugars, model additional adjusted for vegetable intake; for fiber, model additional adjusted for alcohol consumption
Risch et al., 1994 [19] PCC 35–79 1014, 450 Canada Total fiberVegetable fiberFruit fiberCereal fiber OR=0.82 (0.71–0.94) OR=0.63 (0.49–0.8) OR=1.03 (0.75–1.43) OR=0.88 (0.70–1.10) Adjusted for age at diagnosis/interview and the continuous variables age, total daily calorie intake, number of full-term pregnancies, and total duration of oral contraceptive use; each line in this table represents two individual models
Salazar-Martinez et al., 2002 [20] HCC 20–79 713, 84 Mexico Total fiberInsoluble fiberVegetable fiberFruit fiberCereal fiber OR=1.15 (0.65–2.05) OR=0.72 (0.47–1.10) OR=0.94 (0.63–1.40) OR=0.76 (0.51–1.12) OR=1.09 (0.71–1.70) Adjusted for age, total energy intake, number of live births, recent changes in weight, physical activity, and diabetes
Silvera et al., 2007 [26] Cohort 40–59 49,613, 264 Canada Total fiber RR=0.77 (0.52–1.14) Adjusted for age, BMI (kg/m2), alcohol, use of hormone replacement therapy, use of oral contraceptives, parity, age at menarche, menopausal status at baseline, total energy intake, participation in vigorous physical activity, study center, and treatment allocation
Slattery et al., 1989 [21] PCC 20–79 577, 85 United States Total fiber OR=0.8 (0.5–1.5) Adjusted for age, BMI (weight/height2), and number of pregnancies. All dietary variables are in separate logistic models
Tzonou et al., 1993 [22] HCC 18–75 389, 189 Greece Total fiber OR=0.76 (0.64–0.9) Adjusted for age, years of schooling, parity, age at first birth, menopausal status as well as for energy intake
Zhang et al., 2004 [27] HCC 18–75 906, 254 China Insoluble fiber OR=0.36 (0.21–0.62) Adjusted for age, locality, education, family income, BMI, total energy intake, tobacco smoking, alcohol consumption, ovarian cancer in first-degree relatives, parity, menopausal status, and oral contraceptive use

OR: odds ratio; RR: relative risk; CI: confidence intervals; HCC: hospital-based case-control study; PCC: population-based case-control study; BMI: body mass index.

Meta-analysis results

Analysis of the primary pooled statistics revealed that the highest category of dietary fiber intake was associated with a significantly reduced risk of ovarian cancer compared with the lowest category (summarized RR=0.760, 95%CI=0.702–0.823, P<0.001), with no evidence of significant between-study heterogeneity (I2=12.4%, P=0.309) (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Forest plot for assessment of association between dietary fiber intake and risk of ovarian cancer.

In the analysis stratified by study design, the association between dietary fiber intake and ovarian cancer risk was significant in both case-control studies (RR=0.753, 95%CI=0.682–0.832) and cohort studies (RR=0.763, 95%CI=0.633–0.920) (Figure 2). Among the case-control studies, six were population-based case-control (PCC) studies and the other seven were hospital-based case-control (HCC) studies. The results suggested positive associations in PCC and HCC studies. Subgroup analysis according to geographic location revealed decreased risks of ovarian cancer in individuals with the highest compared with the lowest levels of fiber intake among European (RR=0.748, 95%CI=0.664–0.841), American (RR=0.809, 95%CI=0.730–0.897), and Asian populations (RR=0.630, 95%CI=0.452–0.879). Subgroup analysis according to fiber type showed inverse associations between dietary insoluble fiber and vegetable fiber intake and ovarian cancer risk, but no associations between cereal and fruit fiber intake and ovarian cancer risk. The detailed results are shown in Table 2.

Table 2.

Summary RR and 95%CI for the association between dietary fiber intake and ovarian cancer risk.

Subgroup Number of studies Number of cases RR 95% CI P for trend Heterogeneity test
I2 (%) P
Overall 17 7609 0.760 0.702–0.823 <0.001 12.4 0.309
 Fiber type
  Cereal 4 1908 1.088 0.872–1.356 0.455 47.0 0.129
  Fruit 3 1745 0.936 0.786–1.114 0.457 0.0 0.483
  Insoluble 3 1549 0.599 0.416–0.862 0.006 61.0 0.077
  Vegetable 4 1908 0.728 0.569–0.931 0.011 56.0 0.078
 Study design
  Cohort 4 1377 0.763 0.633–0.920 0.005 0.0 0.612
  Case-control 13 6232 0.753 0.682–0.832 <0.001 27.0 0.172
  PCC 6 2873 0.808 0.728–0.897 <0.001 0.0 0.664
  HCC 7 3359 0.701 0.591–0.832 <0.001 45.5 0.088
 Geographic location
  Europe 4 2414 0.748 0.664–0.841 <0.001 0.0 0.858
  America 10 2764 0.809 0.730–0.897 <0.001 0.0 0.520
  Asia 3 2431 0.630 0.452–0.879 0.007 69.9 0.036

RR: relative risk; CI: confidence interval; PCC: population-based case-control study; HCC: hospital-based case-control study.

Sensitivity analysis and publication bias analysis

Sensitivity analysis (Figure 3) showed that no single study affected the overall result, when studies were removed one at a time. Begg’s funnel plots (Figure 4) and Egger’s test (P=0.351) indicated that there was no publication bias in the overall analysis.

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Funnel plot for assessment of publication bias.

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Sensitivity analysis of the association between dietary fiber intake and ovarian cancer risk.

Discussion

The results of this meta-analysis suggested that the highest category of dietary fiber intake could significantly reduce the risk of ovarian cancer compared with the lowest intake. This association was significant in case-control and in cohort studies, and in populations from the United States, Europe, and Asia.

Previous studies confirmed that increased in dietary fiber intake was associated with lower serum estrogen levels and decreased availability of steroid hormones.28,29 Given that serum estrogen has been shown to stimulate ovarian epithelial cell proliferation and promote ovarian tumor progression,30 it seems reasonable that dietary fiber intake may thus also be inversely associated with ovarian cancer risk. Moreover, high dietary fiber intake is characteristic of diets high in whole grains, which contain other compounds, including phenolic compounds and antioxidants, which may also lower the risk of cancer in general.31 High dietary fiber intake may also be a sign of a generally ‘healthier’ dietary pattern and lifestyle, including other factors that are less related to ovarian cancer, such as increased vegetable consumption,32,33 lower fat intake,34 and increased physical activity.35,36 A previous meta-analysis also indicated that high dietary fiber intake was inversely associated with colorectal cancer risk,37,38 all-cause mortality,39 pancreatic cancer,40 gastric cancer,41 breast cancer,42,43 renal cell carcinoma,44 and endometrial cancer.45 All these findings were consistent with our current results.

The current meta-analysis had several important strengths. First, it included a large numbers of cases and participants, thus yielding a more comprehensive result. Second, there was no between-study heterogeneity in the analysis and no single study affected the overall result, which also implied that the results were robust. Third, no bias was detected by Begg’s funnel plots or Egger’s test.

However, the study also had some limitations. First, we only searched for and included openly published articles, and unpublished articles or gray literature which might have met our inclusion criteria could have been missed. Second, 13 of the included studies were case-control studies, in which it was difficult for patients to report their pre-illness diet, potentially leading to recall bias. Although the overall analysis included different kinds of studies, we carried out subgroup analysis and showed that both cohort studies and case-control studies demonstrated a significant relationship between dietary fiber intake and ovarian cancer risk. Third, ovarian cancer is a complex disease with a variety of causative factors, including environmental and genetic factors. Although we extracted the RR and 95%CI adjusted for most covariates, some possible influencing factors were not adjusted for in some studies.

In summary, this meta-analysis concluded that the highest category of dietary fiber intake could significantly reduce the risk of ovarian cancer compared with the lowest fiber intake, suggesting that the consumption of dietary fiber could prevent the development of ovarian cancer.

Declaration of conflicting interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

References

  • 1.Kaku T, Ogawa S, Kawano Y, et al. Histological classification of ovarian cancer. Med Electron Microsc 2003; 36: 9–17. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Al-Alem L, Curry TE., Jr. Ovarian cancer: involvement of the matrix metalloproteinases. Reproduction 2015; 150: R55–R64. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 2013; 63: 11–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Ozols RF. Treatment goals in ovarian cancer. Int J Gynecol Cancer 2005; 15(Suppl 1): 3–11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Crane TE, Khulpateea BR, Alberts DS, et al. Dietary intake and ovarian cancer risk: a systematic review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2014; 23: 255–273. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986; 7: 177–188. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, et al. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ 2003; 327: 557–560. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression. Stat Med 2004; 23: 1663–1682. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, et al. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 1997; 315: 629–634. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 1994; 50: 1088–1101. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Byers T, Marshall J, Graham S, et al. A case-control study of dietary and nondietary factors in ovarian cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1983; 71: 681–686. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Edefonti V, Decarli A, La Vecchia C, et al. Nutrient dietary patterns and the risk of breast and ovarian cancers. Int J Cancer 2008; 122: 609–613. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.McCann SE, Moysich KB, Mettlin C. Intakes of selected nutrients and food groups and risk of ovarian cancer. Nutr Cancer 2001; 39: 19–28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.McCann SE, Freudenheim JL, Marshall JR, et al. Risk of human ovarian cancer is related to dietary intake of selected nutrients, phytochemicals and food groups. J Nutr 2003; 133: 1937–1942. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Nagle CM, Kolahdooz F, Ibiebele TI, et al. Carbohydrate intake, glycemic load, glycemic index, and risk of ovarian cancer. Ann Oncol 2011; 22: 1332–1338. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Pan SY, Ugnat AM, Mao Y, et al. A case-control study of diet and the risk of ovarian cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004; 13: 1521–1527. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Pelucchi C, La Vecchia C, Chatenoud L, et al. Dietary fibres and ovarian cancer risk. Eur J Cancer 2001; 37: 2235–2239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Qin B, Moorman PG, Alberg AJ, et al. Dietary carbohydrate intake, glycaemic load, glycaemic index and ovarian cancer risk in African-American women. Br J Nutr 2016; 115: 694–702. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Risch HA, Jain M, Marrett LD, et al. Dietary fat intake and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994; 86: 1409–1415. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Salazar-Martinez E, Lazcano-Ponce EC, Gonzalez Lira-Lira G, et al. Nutritional determinants of epithelial ovarian cancer risk: a case-control study in Mexico. Oncology 2002; 63: 151–157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Slattery ML, Schuman KL, West DW, et al. Nutrient intake and ovarian cancer. Am J Epidemiol 1989; 130: 497–502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Tzonou A, Hsieh CC, Polychronopoulou A, et al. Diet and ovarian cancer: a case-control study in Greece. Int J Cancer 1993; 55: 411–414. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Hedelin M, Lof M, Andersson TM, et al. Dietary phytoestrogens and the risk of ovarian cancer in the women's lifestyle and health cohort study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011; 20: 308–317. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Kushi LH, Mink PJ, Folsom AR, et al. Prospective study of diet and ovarian cancer. Am J Epidemiol 1999; 149: 21–31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Playdon MC, Nagle CM, Ibiebele TI, et al. Pre-diagnosis diet and survival after a diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Br J Cancer 2017; 116: 1627–1637. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Silvera SA, Jain M, Howe GR, et al. Dietary fiber intake and ovarian cancer risk: a prospective cohort study. Cancer Causes Control 2007; 18: 335–341. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Zhang M, Lee AH, Binns CW. Reproductive and dietary risk factors for epithelial ovarian cancer in China. Gynecol Oncol 2004; 92: 320–326. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Rock CL, Flatt SW, Thomson CA, et al. Effects of a high-fiber, low-fat diet intervention on serum concentrations of reproductive steroid hormones in women with a history of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 2379–2387. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Rose DP, Goldman M, Connolly JM, et al. High-fiber diet reduces serum estrogen concentrations in premenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr 1991; 54: 520–525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Cunat S, Hoffmann P, Pujol P. Estrogens and epithelial ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol 2004; 94: 25–32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Slavin JL. Mechanisms for the impact of whole grain foods on cancer risk. J Am Coll Nutr 2000; 19: 300S–307S. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Han B, Li X, Yu T. Cruciferous vegetables consumption and the risk of ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Diagn Pathol 2014; 9: 7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Hu J, Hu Y, Hu Y, et al. Intake of cruciferous vegetables is associated with reduced risk of ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Asia Pac J Clin Nutr 2015; 24: 101–109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Qiu W, Lu H, Qi Y, et al. Dietary fat intake and ovarian cancer risk: a meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. Oncotarget 2016; 7: 37390–37406. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Zhou LM. Recreational physical activity and risk of ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2014; 15: 5161–5166. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Zhong S, Chen L, Lv M, et al. Nonoccupational physical activity and risk of ovarian cancer: a meta-analysis. Tumour Biol 2014; 35: 11065–11073. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Ben Q, Sun Y, Chai R, et al. Dietary fiber intake reduces risk for colorectal adenoma: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 2014; 146: 689–699 e6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Aune D, Chan DS, Lau R, et al. Dietary fibre, whole grains, and risk of colorectal cancer: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies. BMJ 2011; 343: d6617. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Liu L, Wang S, Liu J. Fiber consumption and all-cause, cardiovascular, and cancer mortalities: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Mol Nutr Food Res 2015; 59: 139–146. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Wang CH, Qiao C, Wang RC, et al. Dietary fiber intake and pancreatic cancer risk: a meta-analysis of epidemiologic studies. Sci Rep 2015; 5: 10834. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Zhang Z, Xu G, Ma M, et al. Dietary fiber intake reduces risk for gastric cancer: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology 2013; 145: 113–120 e3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Aune D, Chan DS, Greenwood DC, et al. Dietary fiber and breast cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. Ann Oncol 2012; 23: 1394–1402. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Dong JY, He K, Wang P, et al. Dietary fiber intake and risk of breast cancer: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Am J Clin Nutr 2011; 94: 900–905. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Huang TB, Ding PP, Chen JF, et al. Dietary fiber intake and risk of renal cell carcinoma: evidence from a meta-analysis. Med Oncol 2014; 31: 125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Bandera EV, Kushi LH, Moore DF, et al. Association between dietary fiber and endometrial cancer: a dose-response meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 2007; 86: 1730–1737. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Journal of International Medical Research are provided here courtesy of SAGE Publications

RESOURCES