Context: Evidence of an association between dietary patterns and individual foods and the risk of overall mortality among cancer survivors has not been reviewed systematically. Objective: The aim of this meta-analysis of cohort studies was to investigate the association between food intake and dietary patterns and overall mortality among cancer survivors. Data Sources: The PubMed and Embase databases were searched. Study Selection: A total of 117 studies enrolling 209 597 cancer survivors were included. Data Extraction: The following data were extracted: study location, types of outcome, population characteristics, dietary assessment method, risk estimates, and adjustment factors. Results: Higher intakes of vegetables and fish were inversely associated with overall mortality, and higher alcohol consumption was positively associated with overall mortality (RR, 1.08; 95%CI, 1.02–1.16). Adherence to the highest category of diet quality was inversely associated with overall mortality (RR, 0.78; 95%CI, 0.72–0.85; postdiagnosis RR, 0.79; 95%CI, 0.71–0.89), as was adherence to the highest category of a prudent/healthy dietary pattern (RR, 0.81; 95%CI, 0.67–0.98; postdiagnosis RR, 0.77; 95%CI, 0.60–0.99). The Western dietary pattern was associated with increased risk of overall mortality (RR, 1.46; 95%CI, 1.27–1.68; postdiagnosis RR, 1.51; 95%CI, 1.24–1.85). Conclusion: Adherence to a high-quality diet and a prudent/healthy dietary pattern is inversely associated with overall mortality among cancer survivors, whereas a Western dietary pattern is positively associated with overall mortality in this population.
Our study has comprehensively cataloged the smoking-associated DNA methylation alterations and showed that these alterations are reversible after smoking cessation.
The objective of this study was to develop a scoring system (NutriGrade) to evaluate the quality of evidence of randomized controlled trial (RCT) and cohort study meta-analyses in nutrition research, building upon previous tools and expert recommendations. NutriGrade aims to assess the meta-evidence of an association or effect between different nutrition factors and outcomes, taking into account nutrition research-specific requirements not considered by other tools. In a pretest study, 6 randomly selected meta-analyses investigating diet-disease relations were evaluated with NutriGrade by 5 independent raters. After revision, NutriGrade was applied by the same raters to 30 randomly selected meta-analyses in the same thematic area. The reliability of ratings of NutriGrade items was calculated with the use of a multirater κ, and reliability of the total (summed scores) was calculated with the use of intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). The following categories for meta-evidence evaluation were established: high (8-10), moderate (6-7.99), low (4-5.99), and very low (0-3.99). The NutriGrade scoring system (maximum of 10 points) comprises the following items: 1) risk of bias, study quality, and study limitations, 2) precision, 3) heterogeneity, 4) directness, 5) publication bias, 6) funding bias, 7) study design, 8) effect size, and 9) dose-response. The NutriGrade score varied between 2.9 (very low meta-evidence) and 8.8 (high meta-evidence) for meta-analyses of RCTs, and it ranged between 3.1 and 8.8 for meta-analyses of cohort studies. The κ value of the ratings for each scoring item varied from 0.32 (95% CI: 0.22, 0.42) for risk of bias for cohort studies and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.99) for study design, with a mean κ of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.53, 0.79). The ICC of the total score was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.69, 0.90). The NutriGrade scoring system showed good agreement and reliability. The initial findings regarding the performance of this newly established scoring system need further evaluation in independent analyses.
Smoking contributed to more hepatocellular carcinomas in this Europe-wide cohort than chronic HBV and HCV infections. Heavy alcohol consumption and obesity also contributed to sizeable fractions of this disease burden. These contributions may be underestimates because EPIC volunteers are likely to be more health conscious than the general population.
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.