Fish consumption could reduce the risk of oral cancer in Europeans: A meta-analysis

Relationship between oily fish intake and breast cancer based on estrogen receptor status: a Mendelian randomization study

OBJECTIVE

We used a Mendelian randomization (MR) method in our research to examine the relationship between genetically determined oily fish intake and breast cancer (BC) incidence.

METHODS

The summary data pertaining to the oily fish intake were acquired from the UK Biobank, which consisted of a sample size of 460,443 people. Information on BC was received from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium (BCAC). We analyzed the causal connection between oily fish intake and BC incidence using various methods, including inverse variance weighting (IVW). Heterogeneity was investigated using Cochran's Q test. IVW, MR-Egger, and MR-PRESSO methods were used for sensitivity analysis. In addition, a multivariate MR adjusted for body mass index (BMI) and weight was used for further research.

RESULTS

Two-sample MR results showed that oily fish intake was negatively associated with total breast cancer (odds ratio (OR) 0.58, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.87, IVW method), estrogen receptor-positive (ER +) breast cancer (OR 0.44, 95% CI 0.21-0.93, IVW method), and estrogen receptor-negative (ER-) breast cancer (OR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.93, IVW method). The sensitivity analysis did not observe the presence of heterogeneity and horizontal pleiotropy. In multivariate MR analysis, the negative association between oily fish intake and total breast cancer (P = 0.03) and ER- breast cancer (P = 0.04) risk persisted after adjusting for BMI and body weight. However, no correlation was found in ER + breast cancer (P = 0.30).

CONCLUSION

The oily fish intake has a negatively correlated with the incidence of total breast cancer, particularly in the cases of ER- breast cancer. There is a lack of substantial evidence supporting a link between the oily fish intake and the incidence of ER + breast cancer.

The role of rare earth elements and dietary intake in tongue cancer: a mediation analysis in southeast China

Objective

The current research aimed to examine how dietary intake and rare earth elements may affect the development of tongue cancer.

Methods

The serum levels of 10 rare earth elements (REEs) in 171 cases and 171 healthy matched controls were measured by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS). The conditional logistic regression was used to examine the relationship between dietary intake, serum levels of 10 REEs, and tongue cancer. Mediation effect and multiplicative interaction analysis were then performed to estimate the potential contribution of REEs in dietary intake associated with tongue cancer.

Results

Compared with the control group, patients with tongue cancer consumed significantly less fish, seafood, fruit, green leafy vegetables, and non-green leafy vegetables, with higher serum praseodymium (Pr), dysprosium (Dy), and lanthanum (La) levels, and lower serum cerium (Ce) and scandium (Sc) levels. The interaction effect was observed between some REEs and food categories. Green vegetables' impact on the risk of tongue cancer is partially attributed to the La and Thorium (Th) elements (P < 0.05, the mediated proportion were 14.933% and 25.280%, respectively). The effect of non-green leafy vegetables for tongue cancer mediated via Pr, Dy, and Th (P < 0.05, the mediated proportion were 0.408%, 12.010%, and 8.969%, respectively), and the Sc components in seafood (P < 0.05, the mediated proportion was 26.120%) is partly responsible for their influence on the risk of tongue cancer.

Conclusion

The correlation between REEs and dietary intakes for tongue cancer is compact but intricate. Some REEs interact with food intake to influence tongue cancer, while others act as a mediator.

Canned Fish Consumption and Upper Digestive Tract Cancers

Canned fish is a widely consumed and affordable food whose effect on cancer risk has been little investigated. We studied its effect on risk of upper digestive tract cancers using data from a network of hospital-based case-control studies from Northern Italy providing information about canned fish consumption as a separate item and including a total of 946 patients with oral cavity and pharynx cancer, 304 patients with esophageal cancer, 230 patients with gastric cancer and 3273 controls. Twenty-three percent of patients with cancer of the oral cavity or pharynx and 26% of those with cancer of the stomach consumed ≥1 serving per week of canned fish, compared to 40% and 49% of the respective control group. Among cases of esophageal cancer and controls 22% consumed ≥1 serving per week of canned fish. Odds ratios for ≥1 vs <1 portion per week were 0.79 (95% Confidence Interval, CI: 0.64-0.97) for cancer of the oral cavity and pharynx, and 0.59 (95% CI: 0.41-0.86) for stomach cancer, whereas there was no inverse association with esophageal cancer. These findings suggest a favorable role of canned fish for selected upper digestive tract cancers.

Poultry and Fish Intake and Pancreatic Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Although several epidemiological studies have investigated associations between poultry and fish consumption and pancreatic cancer (PC) risk, these findings have been inconsistent. The present study aimed to perform a meta-analysis to comprehensively evaluate these associations. We retrieved Eligible cohort studies and case-control studies published before February 2020 from the Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library and applied a random or fixed effects model to calculate the pooled relative risk (RR) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). Publication bias was detected using funnel plots, Begg's test, and Egger's test, and the study quality was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. We included 25 studies in the analyses. The pooled RR of PC for the highest vs. lowest poultry intake category was 1.14 (95% CI: 1.02-1.26) in cohort studies. There was no appreciable link between fish intake and PC risk (RR: 1.00, 95% CI: 0.93-1.07). Our results suggest that large amount of poultry intake may increase PC risk, while fish intake is unlikely to be linked to PC risk. These links require further investigation, particularly between poultry and PC.

Fish Consumption and the Risk of Chronic Disease: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Prospective Cohort Studies

We aimed to present a comprehensive review of published meta-analyses of prospective cohort studies on the association of fish consumption and the risk of chronic disease. A systematic search was undertaken in Pubmed and Scopus to October 2019 to find meta-analyses of observational studies evaluating the association of fish consumption and the risk of chronic disease. Retrospective and cross-sectional studies and studies with unadjusted risk estimates were excluded. The summary relative risk (SRR) for each meta-analysis was recalculated by using a random-effects model. The methodological quality of included meta-analyses and the quality of the evidence were assessed by the AMSTAR and NutriGrade tools, respectively. A total of 34 meta-analyses of prospective observational studies, reporting SRRs for 40 different outcomes obtained from 298 primary prospective cohort studies, were included. Moderate-quality evidence suggested that each 100-g/d increment in fish consumption was associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality (SRR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.87, 0.97), cardiovascular mortality (SRR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.65, 0.87), coronary heart disease (SRR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.79, 0.99), myocardial infarction (SRR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.65, 0.93), stroke (SRR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.99), heart failure (SRR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.67, 0.95), depression (SRR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.79, 0.98), and liver cancer (SRR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.48, 0.87). For cancers of most sites, there was no significant association and the quality of the evidence was rated low and very low. In conclusion, evidence of moderate quality suggests that fish consumption is associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular disease, depression, and mortality and, therefore, can be considered as a healthy animal-based dietary source of protein. Further research is needed for outcomes for which the quality of the evidence was rated low and very low, considering types of fish consumed, different methods of cooking fish, and all potential confounding variables.