Vegetables and total cancer.

1) Total vegetables and total cancer risk.

Background: Almost all articles presented data stratified by gender. Therefore the choice was made to present results for men and women separately. As a consequence, results from two cohorts will not be included in the following analysis: In "The Finnish Mobile Clinic Health Examination Survey Cohort" (Knekt P [7]), and in "The Boyd Orr Cohort" (Maynard M [2003]. See extended table), including 1,480 cancer cases, no associations were found between total vegetables consumption and total cancer risk: RR = 0.93 (0.74-1.17), and 1.34 (0.93-1.93; P = 0.27), respectively.

Men: Data for men was provided by 7 cohorts, including a total of 50,109 cases.
Weak, significant protective effects were found in 2 cohorts of very large size (Boffetta P [18], George SM [22]), including 44,675 cases (89% of all cases). No associations were found in the remaining cohorts. The average RR = 0.95 (excluding incomplete data from Strandhagen E [9]).
Women: Data for women was provided by 5 cohorts, combining 45,371 cases.
A weak, significant protective effect was found in one cohort of very large size (Boffetta P [18]). But a weak, nonsignificantly increased risk (trend) was found in another cohort of very large size (George SM [22]). No other associations were found. The average RR = 0.97.
Inclusion of intermediate levels of consumption:
Among men, (non)significant effects at any level of consumption are as follows:

  • Boffetta P (18) Though the trend was significant, the RR was significant only at an intermediate level of consumption (209-306 g/d).
  • George SM (22) Significant protective effects were found at 2 different levels of consumption (235-312 g/d, and > 424 g/d)

Among women, (non)significant effects at any level of consumption are as follows:

  • Boffetta P (18) At ≥ 307 g/day.
  • George SM (22) Though the trend showed a nonsignificantly increased risk, no RR differed (non)significantly from 1 at any level of consumption.

These analysis show that among men, signicant protective effects were found at an overlapping level of consumption (235-306 g/day). The effects size is RR = 0.95 (including data from the 3 cohorts which could be provided in this analysis), and therefore is identical to the overall effect size for high vs low consumption.

RRs for the association between total vegetables and total cancer risk among men (g/day):



RRs for the association between total vegetables and total cancer risk among women (g/day):


Effect modification.
Smoking status: Effects stratified by smoking status were provided by 4 cohorts (see extended table):

  • George SM (22) A significant protective effect was found among the male part of the cohort (RR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.91-0.97), but not among the male nonsmokers (RR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.91-1.04).
  • Takachi R (20) No effects were found among never smokers (HR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.83-1.13), or ever smokers (HR = 0.94; 95% CI = 0.80-1.11).
  • Boffetta P (18) Significant protective effects were found among never smokers (HR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.96-0.99), and current smokers (HR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.95-0.98), but not among past smokers (HR = 0.98; 95% CI = 0.96-1.00).
  • Hung HC (11) No effects were found among never smokers (RR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.94-1.10), past smokers (RR = 1.01; 95% CI = 0.94-1.08), or current smokers (RR = 0.94 (0.85-1.05).

Some results are hard to interpret. In one cohort results were only given for male never smokers (George SM [22]). And in another cohort, results were only given for nonsmokers vs ever smokers, categorizing past-, and current smokers into one group (Takachi R [20]). Briefly, a small protective effect among never smokers was found in one out of 4 cohorts, and no associations were found among past smokers in 2 cohorts. Also, a small protective effect among current smokers was found in one out of 2 cohorts, and the RR tended to be lower than among the other groups in a second cohort (Hung HC [11]).
Average RR's are 0.98, 0.99, and 0.96 for never, past, and current smokers, respectively.
Alcohol drinking: The significant protective effect in one cohort of very large size was restricted to subjects with heavy alcohol consumption (Boffetta P [18]. see extended table). No difference in effect was found in another cohort (Takachi R [20]).
Dietary supplement use: Some articles showed stronger evidence for a possible protective effect among non-users of multivitamins. (Pooled results from 2 cohorts; Hung HC [11]) or dietary supplements (Olsen A [2005]). In contrast, the effect was slightly more protective among dietary supplement users in a fourth cohort (Benetou V [18]).

Conclusion: Among men, weak significant protective effects were found in 2 cohorts of very large size, and no other associations were found. Total vegetables consumption possibly protects against total cancer risk among men (- 5%). Though this evidence was restricted to an intermediate level of consumption (235-306 g/d), the effect size was identical to the one for high vs low levels of consumption.
Among women, inconsistent findings were done. Inconclusive evidence was found for an association between total vegetables - at any level of consumption - and total cancer risk.
Stratified analysis included the possibility that any protective effect may be stronger among current smokers. Inconclusive evidence was found for a modifying effect of alcohol consumption and dietary supplement use.

Prospective studies of total vegetables and total cancer risk (men):
AuthorCohort nameCasesRelative Risk (RR)
22) George SM (2008)The NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study35,071RR = 0.94 (0.91-0.97; P = 0.004).
20) Takachi R (2007)The JPHC Study1,925HR = 0.95 (0.82-1.10; P = 0.38).
18) Boffetta P (2010)The EPIC Study9,604HR = 0.95 (0.87-1.03; P = 0.04).
15) Jansen MC (2004)The Zutphen Elderly Study138RR = 0.83 (0.54-1.25; P = 0.36).
11) Hung HC (2004)The Health Professionals' Follow-Up Study2500RR = 0.99.
9) Strandhagen E (2000)The Study Of Men Born In 1913226No significant association (no data shown).
2) Shibata A (1992)The Leisure World Study6451.05 (0.89-1.27).
Total number of cases: 50,109Average RR = 0.95



Prospective studies of total vegetables and total cancer risk (women):
AuthorCohort nameCasesRelative Risk (RR)
22) George SM (2008)The NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study15,792RR = 1.04 (0.98-1.09; P = 0.084).
20) Takachi R (2007)The JPHC Study1,305HR = 0.94 (0.78-1.12; P = 0.19).
18) Boffetta P (2010)The EPIC Study21,000HR = 0.92 (0.87-0.97; P = 0.005).
11) Hung HC (2004)The Nurses' Health Study6584RR = 0.99.
2) Shibata A (1992)The Leisure World Study6900.84 (0.70-1.01).
Total number of cases: 45,371Average RR = 0.97



Prospective studies of total vegetables and total cancer risk.
Stratified by smoking status:
AuthorCohort nameCasesRelative Risk (RR) for never smokersRelative Risk (RR) for past smokersRelative Risk (RR) for current smokers
22) George SM (2008)The NIH-AARP Diet and Health StudyNot definedRR = 0.97 (0.91-1.04; P = 0.47).--
20) Takachi R (2008)The JPHC Study1,631 never smokersHR = 0.97 (0.83-1.13; P = 0.26).--
18) Boffetta P (2010)The EPIC Study13,728 never smokers,

8,832 past smokers, and

7,388 current smokers
HR = 0.97 (0.96-0.99).HR = 0.98 (0.96-1.00).HR = 0.97 (0.95-0.98).
11) Hung HC (2004)The Nurses' Health Study

&

The Health Professionals' Follow-up Study
3,577 never smokers,

3,945 past smokers, and

1,694 current smokers
RR = 1.02 (0.94-1.10).RR = 1.01 (0.94-1.08).RR = 0.94 (0.84-1.05).
Average RR = 0.98Average RR = 0.99Average RR = 0.96

2) Total vegetables and total cancer mortality.

6 articles, providing information about 6 different cohorts were found. No associations were found in any cohort. The average RR was 1.07 (excluding incomplete data from Strandhagen E [9], and Hung HC [11]).

Conclusion: No evidence was found for an association between total vegetables and total cancer mortality.

Prospective studies of total vegetables and total cancer mortality:
AuthorCohort nameCasesSexRelative Risk (RR)
18) Nöthlings U (2008)The EPIC Study319Men & WomenRR = 1.09 (0.87-1.39).
13) Maynard M (2003)The Boyd Orr Cohort158Men & WomenOR = 1.14 (0.75-1.72).
11) Hung HC (2004)The Nurses' Health Study &

The Health Professionals' Follow-up Study
Not defined.Men & WomenNo significant association (no data shown).
9) Strandhagen E (2000)The Study Of Men Born In 1913121MenNo significant association (no data shown).
5) Sahyoun NR (1996)No cohort name57Men & WomenRR = 0.80 (0.36-1.76; P = 0.82).
Total number of cases: 655 + XAverage RR = 1.07