| Author | Cohort name | Subjects | Years of follow-up | Cases | End point | Consumption of | Relative Risk (RR) | Adjustments |
| 10) Sakauchi F (2007) | The JACC Study. | 64,327 women aged 40-79.
(Japan) | 13.3
(1988-90 to 2003) | 55 | Ovarian cancer mortality | Tomatoes |
HR = 0.96 (0.43-2.10; P = 0.93) for the highest vs lowest tertile of consumption.
Amount specific data (intake frequency):
≤ 2 times/month: HR = 1.
1-2 times/week: HR = 0.67 (0.26-1.70).
≥ 3 times/week: HR = 0.96 (0.43-2.10). | Age, menopausal status, number of pregnancies, history of sex hormone use, BMI, physical activity, and education. |
| 9) Koushik A (2005) | Pooled analysis of 12 cohort studies. | 560,441 women. | 7-22 | 2,109 | Invasive epithelial ovarian cancer risk | Tomatoes, tomato juice |
INCLUSION CRITERIA:
- At least 50 incident invasive epithelial ovarian cancer cases.
- An assessment of usual diet.
- A validation study of the diet assessment method or a closely related instrument.
INCLUDED STUDIES (Follow-up years/No. of ovarian cancer casses):
- The Adventist Health Study (1976-1988/53).
Singh PN. Dietary risk factors for colon cancer in a low-risk population. Am J Epidemiol. 1998 Oct 15;148(8):761-74. Full text
- The Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project (1987-1999/142).
Hannan LM. Physical activity and risk of ovarian cancer: a prospective cohort study in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004 May;13(5):765-70. Full text
- The Canadian National Breast Screening Study (1980-2000/223).
Terry PD. Cigarette smoking and the risk of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer in a prospective cohort study. Eur J Cancer. 2003 May;39(8):1157-64. Abstract
- The Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort (1992-2001/278).
Calle EE. The American Cancer Society Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort: rationale, study design, and baseline characteristics. Cancer. 2002 Jan 15;94(2):500-11. Abstract
- The Iowa Women's Health Study (1986-2001/208).
Kushi LH. Prospective study of diet and ovarian cancer. Am J Epidemiol. 1999 Jan 1;149(1):21-31 Full text
- The Netherlands Cohort Study (1986-1995/208).
Mommers M. Consumption of vegetables and fruits and risk of ovarian carcinoma. Cancer. 2005 Oct 1;104(7):1512-9. Full text
- The New York State Cohort (1980-1987/77).
Bandera EV. Diet and alcohol consumption and lung cancer risk in the New York State Cohort (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 1997 Nov;8(6):828-40. Abstract
- The New York University Women's Health Study (1985-1998/65).
Kato I. Prospective study of diet and female colorectal cancer: the New York University Women's Health Study. Nutr Cancer. 1997;28(3):276-81. Abstract
- The Nurses' Health Study A + B (A = 1980-1986/120. B = 1986-2002/315).
Fairfield KM. Risk of ovarian carcinoma and consumption of vitamins A, C, and E and specific carotenoids: a prospective analysis. Cancer. 2001 Nov 1;92(9):2318-26. Full text
- The Nurses' Health Study II (1991-2000/52).
Cho E. Premenopausal fat intake and risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003 Jul 16;95(14):1079-85. Full text
- The Swedish Mammography Cohort (1987-2004/285).
Larsson SC. Fruit and vegetable consumption in relation to ovarian cancer incidence: the Swedish Mammography Cohort. Br J Cancer. 2004 Jun 1;90(11):2167-70. Full text
- The Women's Health Study (1993-2004/104).
Higginbotham S. Dietary glycemic load and breast cancer risk in the Women's Health Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004 Jan;13(1):65-70. Full text
RELATIVE RISK:
RR = 0.91 (0.77-1.07) for a daily increment of 1 serving (= 1 tomato/4 oz juice, or 122 g).
P for between-studies heterogeneity = 0.01.
| Parity, oral contraceptive use, menopausal status and postmenopausal hormone use, age at menarche, BMI, physical activity, smoking status, and total energy intake. Age in years and year of questionnaire return were included as stratification variables. |
| 7) Mommers M (2005) | The Netherlands Cohort Study | 62,573 postmenopausal women aged 55-69. | 11,3
(1986-1997) | 240? | Invasive epithelial ovarian cancer incidence | Tomatoes | RR = 0.90 (0.74-1.10) per 25-g per day increment. | Age, height, current cigarette smoking, duration of cigarette smoking, number of cigarettes smoked daily, duration of oral contraceptive use, parity, and all individual fruit or vegetable items listed. |
| 6) Larsson SC (2004) | The Swedish Mammography Cohort | 61,084 women aged 38-76. | 13.5
(1987-90 to 2003) | 266 | Invasive epithelial ovarian cancer incidence | Tomatoes |
RR = 0.86 (0.57-1.30; P = 0.74) for the highest vs lowest quartile of consumption.
Amount specific data (servings/week):
< 1.0: RR = 1.
1.0-< 3.0: RR = 0.99 (0.71-1.38).
3.0-< 5.0: RR = 1.18 (0.79-1.75).
≥ 5.0: RR = 0.86 (0.57-1.30). | Age at baseline, BMI, education, parity, oral contraceptive use, fish consumption, and dietary lactose. |
| 4) Gates MA (2007) | The Nurses' Health Study | 66,940 women aged 38-63.
(USA) | 18
(1984-2002) | 347 | Epithelial ovarian cancer risk | Tomato sauce |
RR = 1.44 (0.90-2.29; P = 0.09) for the highest vs lowest quartile of consumption.
Amount specific data (Servings:
< 2/month: RR = 1.
2/month-< 1/week: RR = 1/30 (0.91-1.87).
1/week: RR = 1.49 (1.02-2.19).
2+/week: RR = 1.44 (0.90-2.29). | Age, duration of oral contraceptive use, parity, history of tubal ligation, smoking status, history of postmenopausal hormone use, physical activity, lactose intake, and total energy intake. |
| 1) Kiani F (2006) | The Adventist Health Study | 13,281 non-Hispanic white California Seventh-day Adventist women aged ≥ 25 without a history of hysterectomy.
(USA) | 1976-1992 | 53
(of which 45 postmenopausal) | Epithelial ovarian cancer risk | Tomatoes |
| All cases: | Postmenopausal cases: |
RR = 0.33 (0.13-0.82; P = 0.002) for the highest vs lowest tertile of consumption.
Amount specific data (Frequency/week):
< 1: RR = 1.
≥ 1 to < 5: RR = 0.71 (0.34-1.48).
≥ 5: RR = 0.33 (0.13-0.82).
|
RR = 0.32 (0.13-0.80; P = 0.006) for the highest vs lowest tertile of consumption.
Amount specific data (Frequency/week):
< 1: RR = 1.
≥ 1 to < 5: RR = 0.56 (0.26-1.20).
≥ 5: RR = 0.32 (0.13-0.80).
|
The associations remained after additional adjustment for either meat, fruit, or cheese.Age, parity, BMI, and for age at menopause and HRT in postmenopausal analyses. |
|