Table 3.
Dose response associations (for each 50 g/1000 kcal per day increase) between different types of meat intake and colorectal cancer (total and subsites) in substitution models
| All colorectal cancers | All colon | Proximal | Distal | Rectum | p value for subsite trend† | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total red meat | 1.35 (1.24,1.46)* | 1.29 (1.17,1.42)* | 1.24 (1.09,1.39)* | 1.34 (1.13,1.55)* | 1.53 (1.28,1.79)* | 0.04 |
| Processed red meat | 1.30 (1.10,1.49)* | 1.19 (0.85,1.53) | 1.27 (0.98,1.56) | 1.08 (0.75,1.41) | 1.41 (0.99,1.83)* | 0.6 |
| Unprocessed red meat | 1.34 (1.22,1.46)* | 1.29 (1.15,1.43)* | 1.21 (1.04,1.37)* | 1.40 (1.15,1.64)* | 1.47 (1.20,1.74)* | 0.05 |
| White meat | 0.74 (0.68,0.80)* | 0.77 (0.70,0.84)* | 0.80 (0.71,0.90)* | 0.74 (0.63,0.86)* | 0.65 (0.54,0.76)* | 0.04 |
| Poultry | 0.73 (0.56,0.89)* | 0.73 (0.53,0.94)* | 0.73 (0.37,1.08) | 0.72 (0.53,0.91)* | 0.71 (0.57,0.85)* | 0.05 |
| Fish | 0.79 (0.68,0.89)* | 0.80 (0.67,0.92)* | 0.78 (0.62,0.93)* | 0.86 (0.64,1.08) | 0.74 (0.54,0.95)* | 0.7 |
| Total processed meat | 1.14 (1.00,1.30)* | 1.16 (1.00,1.36)* | 1.16 (0.95,1.41) | 1.13 (0.88,1.46) | 1.06 (0.81,1.38) | 0.8 |
Using variance-weighted least-square regression modelling, with the beta coefficients from meat and cancer models (described below) as the outcome variable, the subsite location as the independent variable, and the inverse variances of the beta coefficients as weights.
p<0.001
Numbers represent hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for each 50 g/1000 kcal per day increased intake in adjusted models. Models were built for each of the 3 cohorts separately and combined by random-effects meta-analysis. Details for each cohort are presented in supplementary table 1. Models were adjusted for sex, age at entry to study, family history of colorectal cancer, ethnicity, regular use of aspirin and other NSAIDS, education, smoking history, body mass index, alcohol consumption, and daily intakes of fiber, calcium, total energy and total meat.