Lanzamiento Enero 2027

Metaanálisis2015Financiado por la industriaAcceso abierto

Financiado en parte por National Cattlemen's Beef Association, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), a contractor to the Beef Checkoff

A review and meta-analysis of prospective studies of red and processed meat, meat cooking methods, heme iron, heterocyclic amines and prostate cancer

Bylsma LC, Alexander DD

Nutrition journal · 62 citas

Etiquetas de revisión

Financiado por la industria

Datos neutrales que nuestra revisión registró sobre cómo se hizo este estudio. Describen el método, nunca si nos gusta el resultado.

Cómo se estudió

Diseño
Metaanálisis (indexado por PubMed)
Estudiado en
Personas
Resultado principal
Eventos clínicos como enfermedad o muerte
Consumo medido con
No se indica

Quién lo pagó

Financiación
Financiado por la industria
Grupo de la industria
National Cattlemen's Beef Association
Grupo de la industria
National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA), a contractor to the Beef Checkoff

Según 2 financiadores declarados.

Publicación

Publicado
2015-12-01 · Nutr J · vol. 14 · número 1 · pág. 125
Editorial
BioMed Central
Citado
104 citas · más que el 80% de estudios similares · 1.4× el promedio de su campo
Referencias
74 trabajos
Acceso
Acceso abierto (revista) · CC-BY
Áreas de investigación
Nutritional Studies and Diet · Radiation Effects and Dosimetry · Air Quality and Health Impacts
Palabras clave
Red meat, Prostate cancer, Medicine, Prospective cohort study, Heterocyclic amine, Cancer, Processed meat, Prostate, Cohort study, Internal medicine, Environmental health, Food science, Pathology
MeSH
humans, prostatic neoplasms, iron, amines, heme, diet, risk factors, prospective studies, causality, meat, meat products, male, cooking

2 autores

  • Lauren C. Bylsma🇺🇸Michigan United
  • Dominik D. Alexander🇺🇸Michigan United

Resumen

El texto original del estudio, en el idioma en que se publicó.

Prostate cancer remains a significant public health concern among men in the U.S. and worldwide. Epidemiologic studies have generally produced inconclusive results for dietary risk factors for prostate cancer, including consumption of red and processed meats. We aimed to update a previous meta-analysis of prospective cohorts of red and processed meats and prostate cancer with the inclusion of new and updated cohort studies, as well as evaluate meat cooking methods, heme iron, and heterocyclic amine (HCA) intake exposure data. A comprehensive literature search was performed and 26 publications from 19 different cohort studies were included. Random effects models were used to calculate summary relative risk estimates (SRREs) for high vs. low exposure categories. Additionally, meta-regression analyses and stratified intake analyses were conducted to evaluate dose-response relationships. The SRREs for total prostate cancer and total red meat consumption, fresh red meat consumption, and processed meat consumption were 1.02 (95% CI: 0.92-1.12), 1.06 (95% CI: 0.97-1.16), and 1.05 (95% CI: 1.01-1.10), respectively. Analyses were also conducted for the outcomes of non-advanced, advanced, and fatal prostate cancer when sufficient data were available, but these analyses did not produce significant results. No significant SRREs were observed for any of the meat cooking methods, HCA, or heme iron analyses. Dose-response analyses did not reveal significant patterns of associations between red or processed meat and prostate cancer. In conclusion, the results from our analyses do not support an association between red meat or processed consumption and prostate cancer, although we observed a weak positive summary estimate for processed meats.

Resumen vía Europe PMC. Los derechos de autor siguen siendo de los autores o la editorial (CC BY).

Confianza de la comunidad

Cargando…

¿Cuánto confías en los hallazgos de este estudio?

0 · nada10 · totalmente

Comentarios

¿Algo está mal aquí?

Señala este estudio si su información, etiquetas o financiación parecen incorrectas. Un editor revisa cada señalamiento.

Información educativa sobre investigación publicada. No es consejo médico ni una recomendación para empezar o dejar nada.