Oil Gavage Effects on Tumor Incidence in the National Toxicology Program’s 2-Year Carcinogenesis Bioassay

Appleton, B S; Landers, Robert E.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-1835-4_10

Cited by 15 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Section: Dietary Fatmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, these associations are due to correlations with intake of animal fat, not vegetable fat [35], raising the possibility that fat per se is not the responsible factor. Dietary fat promotes tumors in many animal models [9,[36][37][38][39], but this has been either weak [40] or nonexistent [9] in some studies designed specifically to address the independence of fat and total energy intake.The relation between dietary fat intake and breast cancer has been examined in many prospective studies. In a pooled analysis [41], no overall association was seen for total fat intake over the range of 15% to >45% of energy from fat; a similar lack of association was seen in analyses restricted to postmenopausal women.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Diet and Cancer

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The large differences in cancer rates among countries, striking changes in these rates among migrating populations, and rapid changes over time within countries indicate that some aspect of lifestyle or environment is largely responsible for the common cancers in Western countries. Dietary fat has been hypothesized to be the key factor because national consumption is correlated with the international differences. However, detailed analyses in large prospective studies have not supported an important role of dietary fat. Instead, positive energy balance, reflected in early age at menarche and weight gain as an adult, is an important determinant of breast and colon cancers, consistent with numerous studies in animals. As a contributor to positive energy balance, and possibly by other mechanisms, physical inactivity has also been shown to be a risk factor for these diseases and in part accounts for the international differences. Although the percentage of calories from fat in the diet does not appear related to risk of colon cancer, greater risks have been seen with higher consumption of red meat, suggesting that factors other than fat per se are important.In many case-control studies, a high consumption of fruits and vegetables has been associated with reduced risks of numerous cancers, but recent prospective studies suggest these associations may have been overstated. Among the factors in fruits and vegetables that have been examined in relation to cancer risk, present data most strongly support a benefit of higher folic acid consumption in reducing risks of colon and breast cancers. These findings have been bolstered by an association between incidence of colon cancer and a polymorphism in the gene for methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase, an enzyme involved in folic acid metabolism. The benefits of folic acid appear strongest among persons who regularly consume alcohol, which itself is associated with risk of these cancers. Numerous other aspects of diet are hypothesized to influence the risks of cancers in Western countries, but for the moment the evidence is unclear. The Oncologist 2000;5:393-404 The Oncologist 2000;5:393-404 www.TheOncologist.com Correspondence: Walter C. Willett, M.D., Dr. P.H., Department of Nutrition, Harvard School of Public Health, 665 Huntington Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA. Telephone: 617-432-4680; Fax: 617-432-0464 Received June 20, 2000; accepted for publication June 21, 2000. ©AlphaMed Press 1083-7159/2000 The great interest during the last several decades in diet and human cancer derives from the large variations in rates of specific cancers among countries, coupled with the dramatic changes in cancer incidence among populations emigrating to regions with different rates. Such observations indicate the importance of potentially modifiable factors in the cause and prevention of cancer, and a role of diet has been suggested by strong correlations between cancer rates and national per capita intake of specific nutrients. In their comprehensive 1981 review of a...

show abstract

Section: Dietary Fatmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Diet and Cancer

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The hypothesis that fat intake increases breast cancer risk has been supported by most animal models (49, 81), although investigators in a large study that did not use an inducing agent found no association (6). Moreover, much of the effect of dietary fat in the animal studies appears to be due to an increase in total energy intake, and energy restriction profoundly decreases incidence (6,81,157).…”

Section: Carbohydratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, much of the effect of dietary fat in the animal studies appears to be due to an increase in total energy intake, and energy restriction profoundly decreases incidence (6,81,157). Data from many large prospective studies, including ∼8,000 cases in more than 300,000 women, have been published (146).…”

Section: Carbohydratesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current Evidence on Healthy Eating

Willett

Stampfer

2013

Annu. Rev. Public Health

208

139

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Large nutritional epidemiology studies, with long-term follow-up to assess major clinical end points, coupled with advances in basic science and clinical trials, have led to important improvements in our understanding of nutrition in primary prevention of chronic disease. Although much work remains, sufficient evidence has accrued to provide solid advice on healthy eating. Good data now support the benefits of diets that are rich in plant sources of fats and protein, fish, nuts, whole grains, and fruits and vegetables; that avoid partially hydrogenated fats; and that limit red meat and refined carbohydrates. The simplistic advice to reduce all fat, or all carbohydrates, has not stood the test of science; strong evidence supports the need to consider fat and carbohydrate quality and different protein sources. This article briefly summarizes major findings from recent years bearing on these issues.

show abstract

“…Findings from animal studies were also invoked to support a causative role of dietary fat in breast carcinogenesis, although these studies were often confounded by differences in energy balance and weight gain, which clearly influenced breast carcinogenesis, and results have not been consistent [4,5]. The largest animal study by far, which did not include a carcinogenic agent, indicated that a substantial increase in dietary fat did not increase mammary carcinogenesis [6]. The ecological and case-control findings dominated the scientific and public opinion, and dietary fat was widely believed to be an important culprit in breast cancer risk that was to be avoided by women; this provided much of the basis for national recommendations to reduce intake of all types of fat [7].…”

mentioning

confidence: 95%

The Women’s Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial: a post-mortem

Michels

Willett

2008

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ecological correlations derived from national mortality data and case-control studies have suggested a positive relation between dietary fat and risk of breast cancer. However, in the many large prospective studies that have been conducted more recently, little or no association has been found between total fat intake and breast cancer incidence. The recently released results from the Women's Health Initiative Fat Reduction Trial found no significant effect of a low-fat diet on risk of breast cancer or total cancer incidence. However, methodologic limitations of this trial, particularly low compliance with the dietary intervention, make these data difficult to interpret, and in the end this massive trial contributes little to our understanding of the role of fat intake in the risk of breast cancer. A substantial body of available evidence now suggests that the percentage of energy derived from fat intake during midlife does not appear to be an important risk factor for breast cancer and is not the primary reason for the large international differences in disease incidence. Diet has a major impact on breast cancer risk, mainly mediated through childhood growth rates and weight gain in later life. Minimizing weight gain during midlife or weight loss after menopause reduces the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. Massive randomized trials of behavior change to prevent cancer will usually not be a good investment, as clear answers are unlikely. The best information on prevention by diet and lifestyle will generally come from long-term prospective studies combined with controlled trials of intermediate endpoints.

show abstract

Oil Gavage Effects on Tumor Incidence in the National Toxicology Program’s 2-Year Carcinogenesis Bioassay

Cited by 15 publications

References 4 publications

Diet and Cancer

Diet and Cancer

Current Evidence on Healthy Eating

The Women’s Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial: a post-mortem

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About