Circulating Vitamin D and Colorectal Cancer Risk: An International Pooling Project of 17 Cohorts.

BACKGROUND: Experimental and epidemiological studies suggest a protective role for vitamin D in colorectal carcinogenesis, but evidence is inconclusive. Circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentrations that minimize risk are unknown. Current Institute of Medicine (IOM) vitamin D guidance is based solely on bone health. METHODS: We pooled participant-level data from 17 cohorts, comprising 5706 colorectal cancer case participants and 7107 control participants with a wide range of circulating 25(OH)D concentrations. For 30.1% of participants, 25(OH)D was newly measured. Previously measured 25(OH)D was calibrated to the same assay to permit estimating risk by absolute concentrations. Study-specific relative risks (RRs) for prediagnostic season-standardized 25(OH)D concentrations were calculated using conditional logistic regression and pooled using random effects models. RESULTS: Compared with the lower range of sufficiency for bone health (50-<62.5 nmol/L), deficient 25(OH)D (<30 nmol/L) was associated with 31% higher colorectal cancer risk (RR = 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.05 to 1.62); 25(OH)D above sufficiency (75-<87.5 and 87.5-<100 nmol/L) was associated with 19% (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.67 to 0.99) and 27% (RR = 0.73, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.91) lower risk, respectively. At 25(OH)D of 100 nmol/L or greater, risk did not continue to decline and was not statistically significantly reduced (RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.67 to 1.24, 3.5% of control participants). Associations were minimally affected when adjusting for body mass index, physical activity, or other risk factors. For each 25 nmol/L increment in circulating 25(OH)D, colorectal cancer risk was 19% lower in women (RR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.75 to 0.87) and 7% lower in men (RR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.86 to 1.00) (two-sided Pheterogeneity by sex = .008). Associations were inverse in all subgroups, including colorectal subsite, geographic region, and season of blood collection. CONCLUSIONS: Higher circulating 25(OH)D was related to a statistically significant, substantially lower colorectal cancer risk in women and non-statistically significant lower risk in men. Optimal 25(OH)D concentrations for colorectal cancer risk reduction, 75-100 nmol/L, appear higher than current IOM recommendations.

Alcohol consumption and breast cancer risk by estrogen receptor status: in a pooled analysis of 20 studies.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer aetiology may differ by estrogen receptor (ER) status. Associations of alcohol and folate intakes with risk of breast cancer defined by ER status were examined in pooled analyses of the primary data from 20 cohorts. METHODS: During a maximum of 6-18 years of follow-up of 1 089 273 women, 21 624 ER+ and 5113 ER- breast cancers were identified. Study-specific multivariable relative risks (RRs) were calculated using Cox proportional hazards regression models and then combined using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Alcohol consumption was positively associated with risk of ER+ and ER- breast cancer. The pooled multivariable RRs (95% confidence intervals) comparing ≥ 30 g/d with 0 g/day of alcohol consumption were 1.35 (1.23-1.48) for ER+ and 1.28 (1.10-1.49) for ER- breast cancer (Ptrend ≤ 0.001; Pcommon-effects by ER status: 0.57). Associations were similar for alcohol intake from beer, wine and liquor. The associations with alcohol intake did not vary significantly by total (from foods and supplements) folate intake (Pinteraction ≥ 0.26). Dietary (from foods only) and total folate intakes were not associated with risk of overall, ER+ and ER- breast cancer; pooled multivariable RRs ranged from 0.98 to 1.02 comparing extreme quintiles. Following-up US studies through only the period before mandatory folic acid fortification did not change the results. The alcohol and folate associations did not vary by tumour subtypes defined by progesterone receptor status. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol consumption was positively associated with risk of both ER+ and ER- breast cancer, even among women with high folate intake. Folate intake was not associated with breast cancer risk.

Fruit and vegetable intake and risk of breast cancer by hormone receptor status.

BACKGROUND: Estrogen receptor-negative (ER(-)) breast cancer has few known or modifiable risk factors. Because ER(-) tumors account for only 15% to 20% of breast cancers, large pooled analyses are necessary to evaluate precisely the suspected inverse association between fruit and vegetable intake and risk of ER(-) breast cancer. METHODS: Among 993 466 women followed for 11 to 20 years in 20 cohort studies, we documented 19 869 estrogen receptor positive (ER(+)) and 4821 ER(-) breast cancers. We calculated study-specific multivariable relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using Cox proportional hazards regression analyses and then combined them using a random-effects model. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Total fruit and vegetable intake was statistically significantly inversely associated with risk of ER(-) breast cancer but not with risk of breast cancer overall or of ER(+) tumors. The inverse association for ER(-) tumors was observed primarily for vegetable consumption. The pooled relative risks comparing the highest vs lowest quintile of total vegetable consumption were 0.82 (95% CI = 0.74 to 0.90) for ER(-) breast cancer and 1.04 (95% CI = 0.97 to 1.11) for ER(+) breast cancer (P (common-effects) by ER status < .001). Total fruit consumption was non-statistically significantly associated with risk of ER(-) breast cancer (pooled multivariable RR comparing the highest vs lowest quintile = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.04). CONCLUSIONS: We observed no association between total fruit and vegetable intake and risk of overall breast cancer. However, vegetable consumption was inversely associated with risk of ER(-) breast cancer in our large pooled analyses.