↓ Skip to main content

Fruits, vegetables and lung cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Oncology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
blogs
2 blogs
twitter
33 X users
facebook
7 Facebook pages
reddit
1 Redditor
video
2 YouTube creators

Citations

dimensions_citation
211 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
227 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
Fruits, vegetables and lung cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Published in
Annals of Oncology, September 2015
DOI 10.1093/annonc/mdv381
Pubmed ID
Authors

A.R. Vieira, L. Abar, S. Vingeliene, D.S.M. Chan, D. Aune, D. Navarro-Rosenblatt, C. Stevens, D. Greenwood, T. Norat

Abstract

Lung cancer is the most common cause of cancer death. Fruits and vegetables containing carotenoids and other antioxidants have been hypothesized to decrease lung cancer risk. As part of the WCRF International Continuous Update Project, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies. We searched PubMed and several databases up to December 2014 for prospective studies. We conducted meta-analyses comparing highest and lowest intakes and dose-response meta-analyses to estimate summary relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and examine possible nonlinear associations. We combined results from the Pooling Project with the studies we identified to increase the statistical power of our analysis. When comparing the highest with the lowest intakes, the summary RR estimates were 0.86(95% CI: 0.78-0.94; n(studies)=18) for fruits and vegetables, 0.92(95% CI: 0.87-0.97; n=25) for vegetables and 0.82(95% CI: 0.76-0.89; n=29) for fruits. The association with fruit and vegetable intake was marginally significant in current smokers and inverse but not significant in former or never smokers. Significant inverse dose-response associations were observed for each 100 g/day increase: for fruits and vegetables (RR=0.96; 95% CI= 0.94-0.98, I(2) =64%, n=14, N(cases)=9609), vegetables (RR=0.94; 95% CI= 0.89-0.98, I(2) =48%, n=20, N=12 563), and fruits (RR=0.92; 95% CI= 0.89-0.95, I(2) =57%, n=23, N=14506). Our results were consistent among the different type of fruits and vegetables. The strength of the association differed across locations. There was evidence of a non-linear relationship (p<0.01) between fruit and vegetable intake and lung cancer risk showing that no further benefit is obtained when increasing consumption above approximately 400 g per day. Eliminating tobacco smoking is the best strategy to prevent lung cancer. Although residual confounding by smoking cannot be ruled out, the current evidence from prospective studies is consistent with a protective role of fruit and vegetables in lung cancer aetiology.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 33 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 227 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 226 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 46 20%
Student > Bachelor 27 12%
Researcher 25 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 20 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 11 5%
Other 40 18%
Unknown 58 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 54 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 21 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 20 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 7 3%
Other 27 12%
Unknown 75 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 55. 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 13 February 2024.
All research outputs
#796,212
of 25,918,061 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Oncology
#322
of 7,914 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,791
of 281,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Oncology
#4
of 109 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,918,061 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,914 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 281,737 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 109 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 96% of its contemporaries.