Search

PurposeHigh consumption of fruits and vegetables decrease the risk of bladder cancer (BC). The evidence of specific fruits and vegetables and the BC risk is still limited.MethodsFruit and vegetable consumptions in relation to BC risk was examined by pooling individual participant data from case-control studies. Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate study-specific odds ratio's (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and combined using a random-effects model for intakes of total fruits, total vegetables, and subgroups of fruits and vegetables.ResultsA total of 11 case-control studies were included, comprising 5637 BC cases and 10,504 controls. Overall, participants with the highest intakes versus the lowest intakes of fruits in total (OR 0.79; 95% CI 0.68-0.91), citrus fruits (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.65-0.98), pome fruits (OR 0.76; 95% CI 0.65-0.87), and tropical fruits (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.73-0.94) reduced the BC risk. Greater consumption of vegetables in total, and specifically shoot vegetables, was associated with decreased BC risk (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.68-0.96 and OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.78-0.96, respectively). Substantial heterogeneity was observed for the associations between citrus fruits and total vegetables and BC risk.ConclusionThis comprehensive study provides compelling evidence that the consumption of fruits overall, citrus fruits, pome fruits and tropical fruits reduce the BC risk. Besides, evidence was found for an inverse association between total vegetables and shoot vegetables intake.

At present, analysis of diet and bladder cancer (BC) is mostly based on the intake of individual foods. The examination of food combinations provides a scope to deal with the complexity and unpredictability of the diet and aims to overcome the limitations of the study of nutrients and foods in isolation. This article aims to demonstrate the usability of supervised data mining methods to extract the food groups related to BC. In order to derive key food groups associated with BC risk, we applied the data mining technique C5.0 with 10-fold cross-validation in the BLadder cancer Epidemiology and Nutritional Determinants study, including data from eighteen case-control and one nested case-cohort study, compromising 8320 BC cases out of 31 551 participants. Dietary data, on the eleven main food groups of the Eurocode 2 Core classification codebook, and relevant non-diet data (i.e. sex, age and smoking status) were available. Primarily, five key food groups were extracted; in order of importance, beverages (non-milk); grains and grain products; vegetables and vegetable products; fats, oils and their products; meats and meat products were associated with BC risk. Since these food groups are corresponded with previously proposed BC-related dietary factors, data mining seems to be a promising technique in the field of nutritional epidemiology and deserves further examination.

BackgroundInconsistent results for coffee consumption and bladder cancer (BC) risk have been shown in epidemiological studies. This research aims to increase the understanding of the association between coffee consumption and BC risk by bringing together worldwide case-control studies on this topic.MethodsData were collected from 13 case-control comprising of 5,911 cases and 16,172 controls. Pooled multivariate odds ratios (ORs), with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were obtained using multilevel logistic regression models. Furthermore, linear dose-response relationships were examined using fractional polynomial models.ResultsNo association of BC risk was observed with coffee consumption among smokers. However, after adjustment for age, gender, and smoking, the risk was significantly increased for never smokers (ever vs. never coffee consumers: ORmodel2 1.30, 95% CI 1.06-1.59; heavy (> 4 cups/day) coffee consumers vs. never coffee consumers: ORmodel2 1.52, 95% CI 1.18-1.97, p trend = 0.23). In addition, dose-response analyses, in both the overall population and among never smokers, also showed a significant increased BC risk for coffee consumption of more than four cups per day. Among smokers, a significant increased BC risk was shown only after consumption of more than six cups per day.ConclusionThis research suggests that positive associations between coffee consumption and BC among never smokers but not smokers.

BackgroundFew studies have modeled smoking histories by combining smoking intensity and duration to show what profile of smoking behavior is associated with highest risk of bladder cancer. This study aims to provide insight into the association between smoking exposure history and bladder cancer risk by modeling both smoking intensity and duration in a pooled analysis.MethodsWe used data from 15 case-control studies included in the bladder cancer epidemiology and nutritional determinants study, including a total of 6,874 cases and 17,727 controls. To jointly interpret the effects of intensity and duration of smoking, we modeled excess odds ratios per pack-year by intensity continuously to estimate the risk difference between smokers with long duration/low intensity and short duration/high intensity.ResultsThe pattern observed from the pooled excess odds ratios model indicated that for a fixed number of pack-years, smoking for a longer duration at lower intensity was more deleterious for bladder cancer risk than smoking more cigarettes/day for a shorter duration. We observed similar patterns within individual study samples.ConclusionsThis pooled analysis shows that long duration/low intensity smoking is associated with a greater increase in bladder cancer risk than short duration/high intensity smoking within equal pack-year categories, thus confirming studies in other smoking-related cancers and demonstrating that reducing exposure history to a single metric such as pack-years was too restrictive.

BackgroundThis review is the third update of the Cochrane review "Selenium for preventing cancer". Selenium is a naturally occurring element with both nutritional and toxicological properties. Higher selenium exposure and selenium supplements have been suggested to protect against several types of cancer.ObjectivesTo gather and present evidence needed to address two research questions:1. What is the aetiological relationship between selenium exposure and cancer risk in humans?2. Describe the efficacy of selenium supplementation for cancer prevention in humans.Search methodsWe updated electronic searches of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2017, Issue 2), MEDLINE (Ovid, 2013 to January 2017, week 4), and Embase (2013 to 2017, week 6), as well as searches of clinical trial registries.Selection criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and longitudinal observational studies that enrolled adult participants.Data collection and analysisWe performed random-effects (RE) meta-analyses when two or more RCTs were available for a specific outcome. We conducted RE meta-analyses when five or more observational studies were available for a specific outcome. We assessed risk of bias in RCTs and in observational studies using Cochrane's risk assessment tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively. We considered in the primary analysis data pooled from RCTs with low risk of bias. We assessed the certainty of evidence by using the GRADE approach.Main resultsWe included 83 studies in this updated review: two additional RCTs (10 in total) and a few additional trial reports for previously included studies. RCTs involved 27,232 participants allocated to either selenium supplements or placebo. For analyses of RCTs with low risk of bias, the summary risk ratio (RR) for any cancer incidence was 1.01 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.10; 3 studies, 19,475 participants; high-certainty evidence). The RR for estimated cancer mortality was 1.02 (95% CI 0.80 to 1.30; 1 study, 17,444 participants). For the most frequently investigated site-specific cancers, investigators provided little evidence of any effect of selenium supplementation. Two RCTs with 19,009 participants indicated that colorectal cancer was unaffected by selenium administration (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.43), as were non-melanoma skin cancer (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.30 to 4.42; 2 studies, 2027 participants), lung cancer (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.50; 2 studies, 19,009 participants), breast cancer (RR 2.04, 95% CI 0.44 to 9.55; 1 study, 802 participants), bladder cancer (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.52; 2 studies, 19,009 participants), and prostate cancer (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.14; 4 studies, 18,942 participants). Certainty of the evidence was high for all of these cancer sites, except for breast cancer, which was of moderate certainty owing to imprecision, and non-melanoma skin cancer, which we judged as moderate certainty owing to high heterogeneity. RCTs with low risk of bias suggested increased melanoma risk.Results for most outcomes were similar when we included all RCTs in the meta-analysis, regardless of risk of bias. Selenium supplementation did not reduce overall cancer incidence (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.14; 5 studies, 21,860 participants) nor mortality (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.32; 2 studies, 18,698 participants). Summary RRs for site-specific cancers showed limited changes compared with estimates from high-quality studies alone, except for liver cancer, for which results were reversed.In the largest trial, the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Trial, selenium supplementation increased risks of alopecia and dermatitis, and for participants with highest background selenium status, supplementation also increased risk of high-grade prostate cancer. RCTs showed a slightly increased risk of type 2 diabetes associated with supplementation. A hypothesis generated by the Nutritional Prevention of Cancer Trial - that individuals with low blood selenium levels could reduce their risk of cancer (particularly prostate cancer) by increasing selenium intake - has not been confirmed. As RCT participants have been overwhelmingly male (88%), we could not assess the potential influence of sex or gender.We included 15 additional observational cohort studies (70 in total; over 2,360,000 participants). We found that lower cancer incidence (summary odds ratio (OR) 0.72, 95% CI 0.55 to 0.93; 7 studies, 76,239 participants) and lower cancer mortality (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.97; 7 studies, 183,863 participants) were associated with the highest category of selenium exposure compared with the lowest. Cancer incidence was lower in men (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.14, 4 studies, 29,365 men) than in women (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.77, 2 studies, 18,244 women). Data show a decrease in risk of site-specific cancers for stomach, colorectal, lung, breast, bladder, and prostate cancers. However, these studies have major weaknesses due to study design, exposure misclassification, and potential unmeasured confounding due to lifestyle or nutritional factors covarying with selenium exposure beyond those taken into account in multi-variable analyses. In addition, no evidence of a dose-response relation between selenium status and cancer risk emerged. Certainty of evidence was very low for each outcome. Some studies suggested that genetic factors might modify the relation between selenium and cancer risk - an issue that merits further investigation.Authors' conclusionsWell-designed and well-conducted RCTs have shown no beneficial effect of selenium supplements in reducing cancer risk (high certainty of evidence). Some RCTs have raised concerns by reporting a higher incidence of high-grade prostate cancer and type 2 diabetes in participants with selenium supplementation. No clear evidence of an influence of baseline participant selenium status on outcomes has emerged in these studies.Observational longitudinal studies have shown an inverse association between selenium exposure and risk of some cancer types, but null and direct relations have also been reported, and no systematic pattern suggesting dose-response relations has emerged. These studies suffer from limitations inherent to the observational design, including exposure misclassification and unmeasured confounding.Overall, there is no evidence to suggest that increasing selenium intake through diet or supplementation prevents cancer in humans. However, more research is needed to assess whether selenium may modify the risk of cancer in individuals with a specific genetic background or nutritional status, and to investigate possible differential effects of various forms of selenium.

BackgroundIn 2012, more than 400,000 urinary bladder cancer cases occurred worldwide, making it the 7(th) most common type of cancer. Although many previous studies focused on the relationship between diet and bladder cancer, the evidence related to specific food items or nutrients that could be involved in the development of bladder cancer remains inconclusive. Dietary components can either be, or be activated into, potential carcinogens through metabolism, or act to prevent carcinogen damage.Methods/designThe BLadder cancer, Epidemiology and Nutritional Determinants (BLEND) study was set up with the purpose of collecting individual patient data from observational studies on diet and bladder cancer. In total, data from 11,261 bladder cancer cases and 675,532 non-cases from 18 case-control and 6 cohort studies from all over the world were included with the aim to investigate the association between individual food items, nutrients and dietary patterns and risk of developing bladder cancer.DiscussionThe substantial number of cases included in this study will enable us to provide evidence with large statistical power, for dietary recommendations on the prevention of bladder cancer.