Some epidemiologic studies suggest that diets high in total fat, saturated fat, or cholesterol are associated with increased risk of lung cancer. Others suggest that diets high in red meat consumption, particularly well-done red meat, are a lung cancer risk factor. In Iowa, we had the opportunity to investigate concurrently the role of meat intake and macronutrients in lung cancer etiology.
A population-based case-control study of both non-smoking and smoking women was conducted in Iowa. A 70-item food frequency questionnaire (FFQ) was completed by 360 cases and 574 frequency-matched controls. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using logistic regression. Multivariate models included age, education, pack-years of smoking, yellow-green vegetable intake, fruit/fruit juice intake, nutrient density calories, previous non-malignant lung disease, alcohol consumption and body mass index (BMI).
When comparing the fifth (highest) to the first (lowest) quintile of consumption of total fat, saturated fat and cholesterol, we obtained odds ratios of 2.0 (1.3-3.1), 3.0 (1.9-4.7), and 2.0 (1.3-3.0) respectively. However, when red meat was entered into the model along with total fat, saturated fat or cholesterol, the excess risk for the macronutrients disappeared while an odds ratio of 3.3 (1.7-7.6) was obtained for red meat. The odds ratios for red meat consumption were similar among adenocarcinoma cases, OR=3.0 (1.1-7.9) and non-adenocarcinoma cases, OR=3.2 (1.3-8.3) and among life-time nonsmokers and ex-smokers OR=2.8 (1.4-5.4), and current smokers, OR=4.9 (1.1-22.3). Yellow-green vegetables were protective with an odds ratio of 0.4 (0.2-0.7).
Consumption of red meat, was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer even after controlling for total fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, fruit, yellow-green vegetable consumption and smoking history, while yellow-green vegetables are associated with a decreased risk of lung cancer.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 25 March 2018.
All research outputs
#6,776,538
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from Lung Cancer (01695002)
#1,018
of 4,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,994
of 65,330 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Lung Cancer (01695002)
#2
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 65,330 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
