Evidence Hub

Association between dietary 3-monochloropropane-1,2-diol esters (3-MCPDE) and renal cancer in Peninsular Malaysia: exposure assessment and matched case-control study

Siti Hajar Muhamad Rosli, Mei-Siu Lau, Tasnim Khalid, Siti Khuzaimah Maarof, S. Jeyabalan, Syazwani Sirdar Ali, Norhayati Mustafa Khalid, M. F. Md Noh et al.

Food Additives and Contaminants Part A-chemistry Analysis Control Exposure & Risk Assessment, 2023

77 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Abstract 3-Monochloropropane-1,2-diol esters (3-MCPDE) are food contaminants commonly found in refined vegetable oils and fats, which have possible carcinogenic implications in humans. To investigate this clinically, we conducted an occurrence level analysis on eight categories of retail and cooked food commonly consumed in Malaysia. This was used to estimate the daily exposure level, through a questionnaire-based case-control study involving 77 subjects with renal cancer, with 80 matching controls. Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) was calculated using the multiple logistic regression model adjusted for confounding factors. A pooled estimate of total 3-MCPDE intake per day was compared between both groups, to assess exposure and disease outcome. Among the food categories analysed, vegetable fats and oils recorded the highest occurrence levels (mean: 1.91 ± 1.90 mg/kg), significantly more than all other food categories (p < .05). Risk estimation found the Chinese ethnic group to be five times more likely to develop renal cancer compared to Malays (AOR = 5.15, p = .001). However, an inverse association was observed as the 3-MCPDE exposure among the Malays (median: 0.162 ± 0.229 mg/day/person) were found to be significantly higher than the Chinese (p = .001). There was no significant difference (p = .405) in 3-MCPDE intake between the cases (median: 0.115 ± 0.137 mg/day/person) and controls (median: 0.105 ± 0.151 mg/day/person), with no association between high intake of 3-MCPDE and…

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: 77 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