Evidence Hub

A food pattern that is predictive of flavonol intake and risk of pancreatic cancer

Nöthlings U, Murphy SP, Wilkens LR, Boeing H, Schulze MB, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Michaud DS, Roddam A et al.

The American journal of clinical nutrition, 2008

424,978 participants · 58 citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In the Multiethnic Cohort (MEC) study, we showed inverse associations between flavonols and pancreatic cancer risk.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to define a food pattern associated with intakes of quercetin, kaempferol, and myricetin; to examine the association of that pattern with pancreatic cancer risk; and to investigate the associations in an independent study.

DESIGN: Reduced rank regression was applied to dietary data for 183,513 participants in the MEC. A food group pattern was extracted and simplified and applied to dietary data of 424,978 participants in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Dietary intake in both studies was assessed by using specially developed questionnaires. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate relative risks for pancreatic cancer in the MEC (610 cases) and the EPIC (517 cases) studies.

RESULTS: The food group pattern consisted mainly of tea, fruit, cabbage, and wine. In the MEC, inverse associations with pancreatic cancer in smokers were observed for the food group pattern [relative risk: 0.59 (95% CI: 0.31, 1.12) when extreme quintiles were compared; P for trend = 0.03]. In the EPIC study, the simplified pattern was not associated with pancreatic cancer risk (P for trend = 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS: A food pattern associated with the intake of quercetin, kaempferol, and myricetin was associated with lower pancreatic cancer risk in smokers in a US-based population. However,…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case-control, done in people. Its evidence level is 4 of 5 (Low · observational). Observational designs can show an association but not prove cause. Reported size: 424,978 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