MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100061101 · doi:10.1093/jnci/djn386

Fat, Protein, and Meat Consumption and Renal Cell Cancer Risk: A Pooled Analysis of 13 Prospective Studies

2008· article· en· W2100061101 on OpenAlexaff
Jung Eun Lee, Donna Spiegelman, David J. Hunter, Demetrius Albanes, Leslie Bernstein, Piet A. van den Brandt, Julie E. Buring, Eunyoung Cho, Dallas R. English, Jo L. Freudenheim, Graham G. Giles, Saxon Graham, Pamela L. Horn‐Ross, Niclas Håkansson, Michael F. Leitzmann, Satu Männistö, Marjorie L. McCullough, Anthony B. Miller, Alexander S. Parker, Thomas E. Rohan, Arthur Schatzkin, Leo J. Schouten, Carol Sweeney, Walter C. Willett, Alicja Wolk, Shumin M. Zhang, Stephanie A. Smith‐Warner

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal cell carcinoma treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney DiseasesNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsConsumption (sociology)Environmental healthProspective cohort studyMedicineCancerInternal medicineOncologyFood scienceBiologySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Results of several case-control studies suggest that high consumption of meat (all meat, red meat, or processed meat) is associated with an increased risk of renal cell cancer, but only a few prospective studies have examined the associations of intakes of meat, fat, and protein with renal cell cancer. METHODS: We conducted a pooled analysis of 13 prospective studies that included 530,469 women and 244,483 men and had follow-up times of up to 7-20 years to examine associations between meat, fat, and protein intakes and the risk of renal cell cancer. All participants had completed a validated food frequency questionnaire at study entry. Using the primary data from each study, we calculated the study-specific relative risks (RRs) for renal cell cancer by using Cox proportional hazards models and then pooled these RRs by using a random-effects model. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: A total of 1,478 incident cases of renal cell cancer were identified (709 in women and 769 in men). We observed statistically significant positive associations or trends in pooled age-adjusted models for intakes of total fat, saturated fat, monounsaturated fat, polyunsaturated fat, cholesterol, total protein, and animal protein. However, these associations were attenuated and no longer statistically significant after adjusting for body mass index, fruit and vegetable intake, and alcohol intake. For example, the pooled age-adjusted RR of renal cell cancer for the highest vs the lowest quintile of intake for total fat was 1.30 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08 to 1.56; P(trend) = .001) and for total protein was 1.17 (95% CI = 0.99 to 1.38; P(trend) = .02). By comparison, the pooled multivariable RR for the highest vs the lowest quintile of total fat intake was 1.10 (95% CI = 0.92 to 1.32; P(trend) = .31) and of total protein intake was 1.06 (95% CI = 0.89 to 1.26; P(trend) = .37). Intakes of red meat, processed meat, poultry, or seafood were not associated with the risk of renal cell cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Intakes of fat and protein or their subtypes, red meat, processed meat, poultry, and seafood are not associated with risk of renal cell cancer.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.024
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.072
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations87
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer InstituteSame topicRenal cell carcinoma treatmentFrench-language works237,207