Evidence Hub

Diet and Risk of Incident Lung Cancer: A Large Prospective Cohort Study in UK Biobank

Xiao-Xia Wei, Chen Zhu, Meng-Meng Ji, Jing-Yi Fan, Junxing Xie, Yan-Qian Huang, Xiangxiang Jiang, Jing Xu et al.

American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 2021

416,588 participants · 85 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological evidence remains conflicting regarding diet and risk of lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to systematically investigate whether dietary factors are associated with the risk of incident lung cancer in the UK Biobank.

METHODS

A total of 416,588 participants (54% women) from the UK Biobank were included in the present study. Based on baseline data from FFQs, 3 main dietary patterns were identified by using principal component analysis. Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate the association of individual food groups and dietary patterns with lung cancer risk.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up of 7.13 y, 1782 incident lung cancer cases were documented. The association analysis showed high intake of red meat and processed meat was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer (HRper 50 g/d: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.13, 1.65 for red meat; HRper 25 g/d: 1.30; 95% CI: 1.10, 1.53 for processed meat). However, the consumption of fruits (HRper 100 g/d: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.84, 0.95), vegetables (HRper 100 g/d: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.81, 0.99), breakfast cereals (HRper 50 g/d: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.74, 0.89), and dietary fiber (HRper 5 g/d: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.69, 0.84) was inversely associated with the risk of lung cancer. For the dietary pattern analysis [quartile (Q) comparison], high adherence to the Prudent pattern (HRQ4 compared with Q1: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.73, 0.96) was associated with a lower risk of lung cancer, whereas the Western pattern (HRQ4 compared with Q1:…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 416,588 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free