Total meats and total cancer.

Background: Dr. Hirayama examined the effects of a small amount of food groups in relation to a large amount of mortality end points in a Japanese cohort of very large size. An extended review of his work was published as a book in 1990 (Hirayama T [3]). Data about this cohort is seldom included in current systematic reviews about the relations mentioned. Dr. Hirayama published a lot of articles stating that vegetables and meats were related to several disease end points, adjusted for age and sex. However, the book included one page showing effects after multivariate analysis including cigarette smoking, meat, green-yellow vegetables, and alcohol. And this analysis showed that a large amount of previously published effects completely changed when these variables were taken into account.
Since a) Dr. Hirayama himself only published sex, and age-adjusted results in the English language, b) the results were published as a book and not in a peer-reviewed journal, and c) Dr. Hirayama was the only researcher examining this cohort, results from his cohort are debatable. Results will be presented including effects from his work, but his work will not be included in the evidence for a possible effect.

Total cancer risk: Data was provided by 5 articles about 4 cohorts, including a total of 6,398 cases. A significant protective effect was found of vegetarianism vs eating meat from pooled results of 2 cohorts (Key TJ [10]), including 3,033 cases (47% of all cases). No other associations were found. The average RR = 1.10 for total meat consumption (excluding incomplete data from McCullough ML [9]).
Total cancer mortality: Data was provided by 9 articles about 6 cohorts, including a total of 16,916 cases. A strong significantly increased risk was found in one cohort of very large size among men only. No other associations were found. The average RR = 1.25 for total meat consumption.
When results from one cohort with debatable results were excluded (Hirayama T [3]), effects were restricted to findings from 5 primarily vegetarian cohorts, including 2,176 cases. No significant effects were found. RR's for meat consumption were < 1 in 3 cohorts (Chang-Claude J [2]), Key TJ [6], Key TJ [10]), and > 1 in the remaining 2 cohorts (Phillips RL [1], Appleby PN [5]). The average RR = 1.02 for total meat consumption.

Conclusion: A significant protective effect of vegetarianism against total cancer risk was found from pooled results of 2 cohorts, including 47% of all cases. Suggestive evidence was found for an increased total cancer risk of total meat consumption (+ 10%). No associations were found with total cancer mortality.
Perspective: A significant protective effect (RR = 0.88) of vegetarians vs meat eaters was found from pooled results of 2 cohorts (Key TJ [10]). But the effects size was stronger among fish eaters vs meat eaters (RR = 0.82; See extended table).

Prospective studies of total meats and total cancer risk:
AuthorCohort nameCasesRelative Risk (RR)
10) Key TJ (2009)The EPIC-Oxford Cohort

&

The Oxford Vegetarian Study
3,033RR = 0.88 (0.81-0.96) for vegetarians vs meat eaters.
10) Benetou V (2008)The EPIC-Greece Cohort851HR = 1.08 (0.99-1.17) per increment of 50 g meat/day.
9) McCullough ML (2000)The Health Professionals Follow-up Study1,661No association.
4) Knekt P (1994)The Finnish Mobile Clinic Health Survey853RR = 0.97 (0.80-1.17) for the highest vs lowest tertile of meat consumption.
Total number of cases: 6,398Average RR = 1.10


Prospective studies of total meats and total cancer mortality:
AuthorCohort nameCasesRelative Risk (RR)
10) Key TJ (2003)The EPIC-Oxford Study230DRR = 1.11 (0.82-1.51) for vegetarians vs nonvegetarians.
6) Key TJ (1996)The Health Food Shoppers Study451RR = 1.12 (0.93-1.35) for vegetarianism.
5) Appleby PN (2002)The Oxford Vegetarian Study367DRR = 0.90 (0.73-1.11) for vegetarians vs nonvegetarians.
3) Hirayama T (1990)No cohort name defined8,794 men, and

5,946 women
Men: RR = 1.46 (P = < 0.01) for meat consumption ≥ 4 times/week.

Women RR = 0.98 (0.87-1.12) for meat consumption 0 vs ≥ 4 times/week.
2) Chang Claude J (2005)The German Vegetarian Study107RR = 1.04 (0.67-1.62 for vegetarians vs nonvegetarians.
1) Phillips RL (1983)The Adventist Health Study1,021MR = 1.07 (P = > 0.10) for the highest vs lowest tertile of meat consumption.
Total number of cases: 16,916Average RR = 1.25