Assessing the role of ultra-processed foods in colorectal cancer incidence: insights from the EPIC cohort.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Berden Jeroen, Langselius Oliver, González-Gil Esther M, Lopez Jessica Blanco, Nicolas Geneviève, Srour Bernard, Millett Christopher, Vamos Eszter P, Rumgay Harriet, Chang Kiara, Touvier Mathilde, Heath Alicia K, Kyrø Cecilie, Marques Chloé, Jannasch Franziska, Schulze Matthias B, Franco Matteo, Zabala Ana M Jimenez, Tjønneland Anne, van Gils Carla H, Le Cornet Charlotte, Cadeau Claire, Guevara Marcela, Sanchez Maria-José, Hajji-Louati Mariem, Crous-Bou Marta, Tumino Rosario, Pala Valeria, Katzke Verena, Skeie Guri, Vineis Paolo, Ferrari Pietro, Viallon Vivian, Huybrechts Inge
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Studies have reported associations between ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption and colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence, yet the magnitude of these associations remains unclear. This study estimated the cohort-associated fraction (CAF), adapted from the population-attributable fraction metric, between UPF consumption and CRC incidence and explored the potential benefits of substituting UPFs with unprocessed or minimally processed foods. METHODS: Using data from 416,081 middle-aged adults in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort, including 5,845 incident CRC cases, Cox proportional hazards models were applied to estimate associations between UPF consumption (grams/day) and CRC, colon and rectal cancer risks. Substitution analyses were also carried out to estimate associations of replacing UPFs with unprocessed or minimally processed foods, to reflect potentially more interpretable estimates. CAFs quantified the magnitude of these associations. RESULTS: UPF consumption was positively associated with colon cancer (HR1-SD Increment: 1.04 [95%CI: 1.01; 1.08]) and CRC (HR1-SD Increment: 1.04 [95%CI: 1.01; 1.07]) but not with rectal cancer incidence. The CAF for UPF consumption was 5.58% (95%CI: 0.55; 10.50) for colon, and 5.10% (1.10; 9.02) for CRC incidence. Substituting 1-SD of UPFs with unprocessed or minimally processed foods was inversely associated with colon cancer (HR: 0.93, [95%CI: 0.89; 0.97]) and CRC incidence (HR: 0.94, [95%CI: 0.92; 0.98]), in energy- and nutrient-adjusted models. In substitution models, the CAF increased to 9.67% (4.36; 14.85) for colon cancer and 7.30% (3.05; 11.48) for CRC incidence. CONCLUSION: We estimated the magnitude of associations between UPF consumption and CRC incidence, highlighting the potential public health relevance of reducing UPF intake. Given the rising consumption of UPFs and burden of CRC incidence, public health interventions and continued research are needed to address this growing issue.