Background
Epidemiological evidence on the association between nut consumption
and lung cancer risk is limited.
Methods
We investigated this relationship in the
Environment And
Genetics in Lung cancer
Etiology (EAGLE) study, a population-based case-control study, and the
National Institutes of Health (NIH) American Association of Retired Persons
(AARP) Diet and Health Study, a prospective cohort. We identified 2098 lung
cases for EAGLE and 18,533 incident cases in AARP. Diet was assessed by food
frequency questionnaire for both studies. Multivariable odds ratios (ORs)
and hazards ratio (HRs) and respective 95% confidence intervals
(CIs) were calculated using unconditional logistic regression and Cox
proportional hazards regression for EAGLE and AARP, respectively.
Results
Higher frequency of intake of nut consumption was inversely
associated with overall lung cancer risk (highest-versus-lowest quintile,
OREAGLE=0.74, 95% CI=0.57–0.95;
HRAARP=0.86, 95% CI=0.81–0.91), regardless of
smoking status. Results from the prospective cohort showed similar
associations across histological subtypes, and a more pronounced benefits
from nut consumption for those who smoked 1–20 cigarettes/day
(OREAGLE=0.61, 95% CI=0.39–0.95;
HRAARP=0.83, 95% CI=0.74–0.94).
Conclusions
Nut consumption was inversely associated with lung cancer in two
large population-based studies, and associations were independent of
cigarette smoking and other known risk factors.
Impact
To our knowledge, this is the first study that examined the
association between nut consumption and lung cancer risk by histologic
subtypes and smoking intensity.
Calcium is an important structural component of the skeletal system. Although an adequate intake of calcium helps to maintain bone health and reduce the risk of osteoporosis, many women do not meet recommended daily intakes of calcium. Previous interventions studies designed to increase dietary intake of women have utilized primarily dairy sources of calcium or supplements. However, lactose intolerance, milk protein allergies, or food preferences may lead many women to exclude important dairy sources of dietary calcium. Therefore, we undertook a 9 week randomized crossover design trial to examine the potential benefit of including a non-dairy source of calcium in the diet of women. Following a 3 week run-in baseline period, 35 healthy women > 18 years were randomized by crossover design into either Group I or Group II. Group I added 2 calcium-fortified cereal bars daily (total of 400 mg calcium/day) (intervention) to their usual diet and Group II continued their usual diet (control). At the end of 3 weeks, diets were switched for another 3 weeks. Intakes of calcium and energy were estimated from 3-day diet and supplemental diaries. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used for within group comparisons and Mann Whitney U tests were used for between group comparisons of calcium and energy intake. Dietary calcium was significantly higher during intervention (1071 mg/d) when participants consumed 2 calcium-fortified cereal bars daily than during the baseline (720 mg/d, P <0.0001) or control diets (775 mg/d, P = 0.0001) periods. Furthermore, the addition of 2 calcium-fortified cereal bars daily for the 3 week intervention did not significantly increase total energy intake or result in weight gain. In conclusion, consumption of calcium-fortified cereal bars significantly increased calcium intake of women. Further research examining the potential ability of fortified cereal bars to help maintain and improve bone health of women is warranted.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01508689
<p>Hazard ratios (95% Confidence Intervals) for the lag analyses by 5 years and 10 years for lung cancer and nut consumption in AARP, by histologic subtypes</p>
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.