Body size and obesity during adulthood, and risk of lympho-haematopoietic cancers: an update of the WCRF-AICR systematic review of published prospective studies.

BACKGROUND: To summarise the evidence on the associations between body mass index (BMI) and BMI in early adulthood, height, waist circumference (WC) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), and risk of lympho-haematopoietic cancers. METHOD: We conducted a meta-analysis of prospective studies and identified relevant studies published up to December 2017 by searching PubMed. A random-effects model was used to calculate dose-response summary relative risks (RRs). RESULTS: Our findings showed BMI, and BMI in early adulthood (aged 18-21 years) is associated with the risk of Hodgkin's and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL and NHL), diffuse large beta-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), Leukaemia including acute and chronic myeloid lymphoma (AML and CML), and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) and multiple myeloma (MM). The summary RR per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI were 1.12 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.05-1.20] for HL, 1.05 (95% CI: 1.03-1.08) for NHL, 1.11 (95% CI: 1.05-1.16) for DLBCL, 1.06 (95% CI: 1.03-1.09) for ML, 1.09 (95% CI: 1.03-1.15) for leukaemia, 1.13 (95% CI: 1.04-1.24) for AML, 1.13 (95% CI: 1.05-1.22) for CML and 1.04 (95% CI: 1.00-1.09) for CLL, and were1.12 (95% CI: 1.05-1.19) for NHL, 1.22 (95% CI: 1.09-1.37) for DLBCL, and 1.19 (95% CI: 1.03-1.38) for FL for BMI in early adulthood analysis. Results on mortality showed a 15%, 16% and 17% increased risk of NHL, MM and leukaemia, respectively. Greater height increased the risk of NHL by 7%, DLBCL by 10%, FL by 9%, MM by 5% and Leukaemia by 7%. WHR was associated with increased risk of DLBCL by 12%. No association was found between higher WC and risk of MM. CONCLUSION: Our results revealed that general adiposity in adulthood and early adulthood, and greater height may increase the risk of almost all types of lympho-haematopoietic cancers and this adds to a growing body of evidence linking body fatness to several types of cancers.

An update of the WCRF/AICR systematic literature review and meta-analysis on dietary and anthropometric factors and esophageal cancer risk.

BACKGROUND: In the 2007 World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research Second Expert Report, the expert panel judged that there was strong evidence that alcoholic drinks and body fatness increased esophageal cancer risk, whereas fruits and vegetables probably decreased its risk. The judgments were mainly based on case-control studies. As part of the Continuous Update Project, we updated the scientific evidence accumulated from cohort studies in this topic. METHODS: We updated the Continuous Update Project database up to 10 January 2017 by searching in PubMed and conducted dose-response meta-analyses to estimate summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using random effects model. RESULTS: A total of 57 cohort studies were included in 13 meta-analyses. Esophageal adenocarcinoma risk was inversely related to vegetable intake (RR per 100 g/day: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.80-0.99, n = 3) and directly associated with body mass index (RR per 5 kg/m2: 1.47, 95% CI: 1.34-1.61, n = 9). For esophageal squamous cell carcinoma, inverse associations were observed with fruit intake (RR for 100 g/day increment: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.75-0.94, n = 3) and body mass index (RR for 5 kg/m2 increment: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.56-0.73, n = 8), and direct associations with intakes of processed meats (RR for 50 g/day increment: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.11-2.28, n = 3), processed and red meats (RR for 100 g/day increment: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.04-1.82, n = 3) and alcohol (RR for 10 g/day increment: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.12-1.41, n = 6). CONCLUSIONS: Evidence from cohort studies suggested a protective role of vegetables and body weight control in esophageal adenocarcinomas development. For squamous cell carcinomas, higher intakes of red and processed meats and alcohol may increase the risk, whereas fruits intake may play a protective role.

Foods and beverages and colorectal cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies, an update of the evidence of the WCRF-AICR Continuous Update Project.

OBJECTIVE: As part of the World Cancer Research Fund International Continuous Update Project, we updated the systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies to quantify the dose-response between foods and beverages intake and colorectal cancer risk. DATA SOURCES: PubMed and several databases up to 31 May 2015. STUDY SELECTION: Prospective studies reporting adjusted relative risk estimates for the association of specific food groups and beverages and risk of colorectal, colon and rectal cancer. DATA SYNTHESIS: Dose-response meta-analyses using random effect models to estimate summary relative risks (RRs). RESULTS: About 400 individual study estimates from 111 unique cohort studies were included. Overall, the risk increase of colorectal cancer is 12% for each 100 g/day increase of red and processed meat intake (95% CI = 4-21%, I2=70%, pheterogeneity (ph)<0.01) and 7% for 10 g/day increase of ethanol intake in alcoholic drinks (95% CI = 5-9%, I2=25%, ph = 0.21). Colorectal cancer risk decrease in 17% for each 90g/day increase of whole grains (95% CI = 11-21%, I2 = 0%, ph = 0.30, 6 studies) and 13% for each 400 g/day increase of dairy products intake (95% CI = 10-17%, I2 = 18%, ph = 0.27, 10 studies). Inverse associations were also observed for vegetables intake (RR per 100 g/day =0.98 (95% CI = 0.96-0.99, I2=0%, ph = 0.48, 11 studies) and for fish intake (RR for 100 g/day = 0.89 (95% CI = 0.80-0.99, I2=0%, ph = 0.52, 11 studies), that were weak for vegetables and driven by one study for fish. Intakes of fruits, coffee, tea, cheese, poultry and legumes were not associated with colorectal cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reinforce the evidence that high intake of red and processed meat and alcohol increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Milk and whole grains may have a protective role against colorectal cancer. The evidence for vegetables and fish was less convincing.

Adult weight gain and colorectal adenomas-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal adenomas are known as precursors for the majority of colorectal carcinomas. While weight gain during adulthood has been identified as a risk factor for colorectal cancer, the association is less clear for colorectal adenomas. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the evidence on this association. METHODS: We searched Medline up to September 2016 to identify observational (prospective, cross-sectional and retrospective) studies on weight gain during adulthood and colorectal adenoma occurrence and recurrence. We conducted meta-analysis on high weight gain versus stable weight, linear and non-linear dose-response meta-analyses to analyze the association. Summary odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were estimated using a random effects model. RESULTS: For colorectal adenoma occurrence, the summary OR was 1.39 (95% CI: 1.17-1.65; I2: 43%, N = 9 studies, cases = 5507) comparing high (midpoint: 17.4 kg) versus stable weight gain during adulthood and with each 5 kg weight gain the odds increased by 7% (2%-11%; I2: 65%, N = 7 studies). Although there was indication of non-linearity (Pnon-linearity < 0.001) there was an increased odds of colorectal adenoma throughout the whole range of weight gain. Three studies were identified investigating the association between weight gain and colorectal adenoma recurrence and data were limited to draw firm conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: Even a small amount of adult weight gain was related to a higher odds of colorectal adenoma occurrence. Our findings add to the benefits of weight control in adulthood regarding colorectal adenoma occurrence, which might be relevant for early prevention of colorectal cancer.

Fruits, vegetables and lung cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death. Fruits and vegetables containing carotenoids and other antioxidants have been hypothesized to decrease lung cancer risk. As part of the World Cancer Research Fund International Continuous Update Project, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. METHODS: We searched PubMed and several databases up to December 2014 for prospective studies. We conducted meta-analyses comparing the highest and lowest intakes and dose-response meta-analyses to estimate summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and examine possible non-linear associations. We combined results from the Pooling Project with the studies we identified to increase the statistical power of our analysis. RESULTS: When comparing the highest with the lowest intakes, the summary RR estimates were 0.86 [95% CI 0.78-0.94; n (studies) = 18] for fruits and vegetables, 0.92 (95% CI 0.87-0.97; n = 25) for vegetables and 0.82 (95% CI 0.76-0.89; n = 29) for fruits. The association with fruit and vegetable intake was marginally significant in current smokers and inverse but not significant in former or never smokers. Significant inverse dose-response associations were observed for each 100 g/day increase: for fruits and vegetables [RR: 0.96; 95% CI 0.94-0.98, I(2) = 64%, n = 14, N (cases) = 9609], vegetables (RR: 0.94; 95% CI 0.89-0.98, I(2) = 48%, n = 20, N = 12 563) and fruits (RR: 0.92; 95% CI 0.89-0.95, I(2) = 57%, n = 23, N = 14 506). Our results were consistent among the different types of fruits and vegetables. The strength of the association differed across locations. There was evidence of a non-linear relationship (P < 0.01) between fruit and vegetable intake and lung cancer risk showing that no further benefit is obtained when increasing consumption above ∼400 g per day. CONCLUSIONS: Eliminating tobacco smoking is the best strategy to prevent lung cancer. Although residual confounding by smoking cannot be ruled out, the current evidence from prospective studies is consistent with a protective role of fruit and vegetables in lung cancer aetiology.

Anthropometric factors and endometrial cancer risk: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies.

BACKGROUND: Greater body mass index (BMI) has been convincingly related to increased endometrial cancer risk, however, whether adiposity earlier in life or abdominal fatness is an independent risk factor and whether weight gain or greater height increases the risk is not clear. METHODS: As part of the Continuous Update Project of the World Cancer Research Fund International, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies of the association between anthropometric measures and endometrial cancer risk and searched PubMed and several other databases up to February 2015. Summary relative risks (RRs) were calculated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: Thirty prospective studies of BMI and endometrial cancer risk with 22 320 cases among 6 445 402 participants were included. The summary RR for a 5-unit increment was 1.54 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47-1.61, I(2) = 81%]. Although the test for non-linearity was significant, Pnon-linearity < 0.0001, and the curve was steeper within the overweight and obese BMI ranges, there was evidence of increased risk even within the high normal BMI range. The summary RR was 1.45 (95% CI 1.28-1.64, I(2) = 76%) per 5 BMI units for BMI in young adulthood, 1.18 (95% CI 1.14-1.23, I(2) = 67%) per 5 kg increase of weight, and 1.16 (95% CI 1.12-1.20, I(2) = 51%) per 5 kg of weight gained between young adulthood and study baseline, 1.27 (95% CI 1.17-1.39, I(2) = 71%) per 10 cm increase in waist circumference, 1.21 (95% CI 1.13-1.29, I(2) = 0%) per 0.1-unit increment in waist-to-hip ratio and 1.30 (95% CI 1.19-1.41, I(2) = 0%) per 10-cm increase in hips circumference. The summary RR was 1.15 (95% CI 1.09-1.22, I(2) = 61%) for a 10-cm increase in height. CONCLUSIONS: All measures of adiposity were associated with increased risk of endometrial cancer, and in addition increasing height was associated with increased risk.