↓ Skip to main content

Fruit and vegetable intake and the risk of stomach and oesophagus adenocarcinoma in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC–EURGAST)

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Cancer, February 2006
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
policy
3 policy sources

Citations

dimensions_citation
276 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Fruit and vegetable intake and the risk of stomach and oesophagus adenocarcinoma in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC–EURGAST)
Published in
International Journal of Cancer, February 2006
DOI 10.1002/ijc.21678
Pubmed ID
Authors

Carlos A. González, Guillem Pera, Antonio Agudo, H. Bas Bueno‐de‐Mesquita, Marco Ceroti, Heiner Boeing, Mandy Schulz, Giuseppe Del Giudice, Mario Plebani, Fátima Carneiro, Franco Berrino, Carlotta Sacerdote, Rosario Tumino, Salvatore Panico, Göran Berglund, Henrik Simán, Göran Hallmans, Roger Stenling, Carmen Martinez, Miren Dorronsoro, Aurelio Barricarte, Carmen Navarro, José R. Quiros, Naomi Allen, Timothy J. Key, Sheila Bingham, Nicholas E. Day, Jakob Linseisen, Gabriele Nagel, Kim Overvad, Majken K. Jensen, Anja Olsen, Anne Tjønneland, Frederike L. Büchner, Petra HM. Peeters, Mattijs E. Numans, Françoise Clavel‐Chapelon, Marie‐Christine Boutron‐Ruault, Dimitrios Roukos, Antonia Trichopoulou, Theodora Psaltopoulou, Eiliv Lund, Corinne Casagrande, Nadia Slimani, Mazda Jenab, Elio Riboli

Abstract

It is considered that fruit and vegetable (F&V) protect against oesophagus and gastric cancer (GC). However, 2 recent meta-analyses suggest that the strength of association on GC seems to be weaker for vegetables than for fruit and weaker in cohort than in case-control studies. No evidence exists from cohort studies about adenocarcinoma of oesophagus (ACO). In 521,457 men and women participating in the EPIC cohort in 10 European countries, information of diet and lifestyle was collected at baseline. After an average of 6.5 years of follow-up, a total of 330 GC and 65 ACO, confirmed and classified by a panel of pathologists, was used for the analysis. We examined the relation between F&V intake and GC and ACO. A calibration study in a sub-sample was used to control diet measurement errors. In a sub-sample of cases and a random sample of controls, antibodies against Helicobacter pylori (Hp) were measured and interactions with F&V were examined in a nested case-control study. We observed no association with total vegetable intake or specific groups of vegetables and GC risk, except for the intestinal type, where a negative association is possible regarding total vegetable (calibrated HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.35-1.22 per 100 g increase) and onion and garlic intake (calibrated HR 0.70; 95% CI 0.38-1.29 per 10 g increase). No evidence of association between fresh fruit intake and GC risk was observed. We found a negative but non significant association between citrus fruit intake and the cardia site (calibrated HR 0.77; 95% CI 0.47-1.22 per 100 g increase) while no association was observed with the non-cardia site. Regarding ACO, we found a non significant negative association for vegetable intake and for citrus intake (calibrated HRs 0.72; 95% CI 0.32-1.64 and 0.77; 95% CI 0.46-1.28 per 100 and 50 g increase, respectively). It seems that Hp infection does not modify the effect of F&V intake. Our study supports a possible protective role of vegetable intake in the intestinal type of GC and the ACO. Citrus fruit consumption may have a role in the protection against cardia GC and ACO.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Malaysia 1 <1%
New Zealand 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 124 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 17%
Researcher 21 17%
Student > Master 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 10 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 6%
Other 26 20%
Unknown 28 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 44 35%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 20 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 8 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 5%
Social Sciences 4 3%
Other 11 9%
Unknown 34 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,341,702
of 24,627,841 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Cancer
#447
of 12,093 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,159
of 76,713 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Cancer
#2
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,627,841 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,093 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 76,713 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.