Citrus fruit and lung cancer.

Lung cancer risk: Data about lung cancer risk was provided by 9 cohorts including a total of 10,704 cases. Significant protective effects of high vs low consumption were found in one cohort examining men + women (11), and in two other cohorts examining women only (10, 14) including a total of 2,126 cases (20% of all cases). No other associations were found. The average RR = 0.90 (excluding incomplete data from Liu Y [25]).
Results for men: Data about men only was provided by 2 cohorts (14, 29), incuding 4,092 cases. No associations were found. The average RR = 1.00.
Results for women: Data about women only was provided by 3 cohorts (10, 14, 29), including 3,477 cases. Significant protective effects were found in one cohort (14), and in a second cohort among ever smokers (10), including 1,163 cases (33% of all cases). The average RR = 0.86.
When extreme categories of consumption were considered, the effects size became stronger and significant in one of the cohorts (RR = 0.91 to 0.80 for Wright ME [29]). As a result, the average RR became: 0.79.

Prospective studies of citrus fruit and lung cancer risk:
AuthorCohort nameCasesRelative Risk (RR)
29) Wright ME (2008)The NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study3,834 men, and

2,201 women
Men: RR = 0.99 (0.89-1.10; P = 0.68).

Women: RR = 0.91 (0.79-1.04; P = 0.55).
25) Liu Y (2004)The JPHC Study251No association.
22) Neuhouser ML (2003)The CARET326 placebo, and

414 intervention
Placebo arm: RR = 0.72 (0.46-1.10; P = 0.15).

Intervention arm: RR = 0.84 (0.58-1.21; P = 0.22).
19) Linseisen J (2007)The EPIC Study1,126HR = 0.87 (0.70-1.07).
14) Feskanich D (2000)The Health Professional's Follow-up Study

&

The Nurses' Health Study
258 men, and

516 women
Men: RR = 1.12 (0.77-1.61).

Women: RR = 0.72 (0.54-0.97).
11) Voorrips LE (2000)The Netherlands Cohort Study963RR = 0.8 (0.6-1.1; P = 0.01).
10) Cutler GJ (2008)The Iowa Women's Health Study113 never smokers, and

647 ever smokers
Never smokers: RR = 1.12 (0.70-1.76; P = 0.61).

Ever smokers: RR = 0.73 (0.60-0.89; P = 0.01).
7) Fraser GE (1991)The Adventist Health Study55RR = 0.64 (0.35-1.17).
Total number of cases: 10,704Average RR = 0.90


Inclusion of intermediate levels of consumption:
The figure below includes RRs for the association between citrus fruit and lung cancer risk among women. Significant protective effects were found of high vs low consumption in 2 cohorts (Cutler GJ among ever smokers at ≥ 4 servings/wk; and Feskanich D at > 9 servings/wk), and at an intermediate level of consumption in the remaining cohort (Wright ME at 7 servings/wk).

RRs for the association between total citrus fruit and lung cancer risk among women (servings/wk):


Effect modification: Inconsistent findings were done among current- (11, 19, 29), and never smokers (10, 19, 29). But a consistent lack of an association was found among past smokers (11, 19, 29).

Lung cancer mortality: Data about lung cancer mortality was provided by 3 cohorts. Significant protective effects were found among men in 2 cohorts (5, 17), while no association was found among women (17). The level of consumption for this effect could not be defined, because no definitions of units of consumption were given in the smaller cohort. The average RR = 0.76.

Conclusion: Among women, significant protective effects of high vs low consumption were found in 2 cohorts of moderate-large size. In addition, a significant protective effect was found in one cohort of very large size at an intermediate level of consumption. Among women, citrus fruit possibly protects against lung cancer risk (- 14%). This effect was found a at a median level of consumption (7 servings/wk), and suggestive evidence was found for a protective effect at > 9 servings/wk. No consistent evidence was found for effect modification, but no evidence was found for an association among past smokers.
Significant protective effects against lung cancer mortality were found among men in 2 cohorts, one of which was of very small size. Suggestive evidence was found for a protective effect of citrus fruit against lung cancer mortality among men (- 24%). No level of consumption could be defined for this effect.