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.

PurposeThere is no published dose–response meta-analysis on the association between height and colorectal cancer risk (CRC) by sex and anatomical sub-site. We conducted a meta-analysis of prospective studies on the association between height and CRC risk with subgroup analysis and updated evidence on the association between body fatness and CRC risk.MethodsPubMed and several other databases were searched up to November 2016. A random effects model was used to calculate dose–response summary relative risks (RR’s).Results47 studies were included in the meta-analyses including 50,936 cases among 7,393,510 participants. The findings support the existing evidence regarding a positive association of height, general and abdominal body fatness and CRC risk. The summary RR were 1.04 [95% (CI)1.02–1.05, I² = 91%] per 5 cm increase in height, 1.02 [95% (CI)1.01–1.02, I² = 0%] per 5 kg increase in weight, 1.06 [95% (CI)1.04–1.07, I² = 83%] per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI, 1.02 [95% (CI)1.02–1.03, I² = 4%] per 10 cm increase in waist circumference, 1.03 [95% (CI)1.01–1.05, I² = 16%] per 0.1 unit increase in waist to hip ratio. The significant association for height and CRC risk was similar in men and women. The significant association for BMI and CRC risk was stronger in men than in women.ConclusionThe positive association between height and risk of CRC suggests that life factors during childhood and early adulthood might play a role in CRC aetiology. Higher general and abdominal body fatness during adulthood are risk factors of CRC and these associations are stronger in men than in women.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00394-017-1557-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundIn 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.MethodsWe 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.ResultsA 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).ConclusionsEvidence 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.

Menopausal and hormone receptor status, but not BMI, might be potential influencing factors for the associations between carbohydrate intake, glycemic index, glycemic load, and breast cancer.