Total Nut, Tree Nut, Peanut, and Peanut Butter Consumption and the Risk of Pancreatic Cancer in the Netherlands Cohort Study

Abstract

Nut intake has been associated with decreased cancer-related mortality, but few studies have examined the potential of nuts in the chemoprevention of pancreatic cancer. We prospectively investigated the association of total nut, tree nut, peanut, and peanut butter consumption with pancreatic cancer risk. In the Netherlands Cohort Study, 120,852 men and women completed a baseline questionnaire, including a food frequency questionnaire, in 1986. After 20.3 years of follow-up, 583 incident pancreatic cancer cases, including 349 microscopically confirmed pancreatic cancer (MCPC) cases, were included in multivariable case-cohort analyses. Increased total nut consumption was associated with a nonsignificantly decreased MCPC risk in men [HR (95% confidence interval) for 10+ g/d vs. nonconsumers = 0.72 (0.47-1.11), = 0.163]. No clear association was found in women. For tree nut and peanut consumption, nonsignificant inverse associations were observed in men. In women, no or unclear associations were found for tree nut and peanut consumption. Peanut butter intake was related to a significantly reduced risk of MCPC in men [HR (95% confidence interval) for 5+ g/d vs. nonconsumers = 0.53 (0.28-1.00), = 0.047], but this relation was not clear in women. Evidence for a nonlinear dose-response relation with MCPC was found for tree nut intake only. The associations were weaker when looking at total pancreatic cancer. Our results suggest that nuts and peanut butter might reduce pancreatic cancer risk in men. In women, no or unclear associations were found. Nut consumption might reduce the risk of pancreatic cancer in men. .

Consumption of nuts and seeds and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition

“…Despite observing lower relative risks for higher consumers compared to nonconsumers (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63-1.11; p-trend = 0.17), none of the associations or trend tests were statistically significant. 16 Our results are consistent with those from the case-control study, the Netherlands Cohort Study and the Golestan Cohort Study studies, but not with the Nurses' Health Study. Nonetheless, we advise caution when comparing results across studies since nut consumption was assessed differently, and the types of nuts consumed differed between studies.…”

“…The most recent study was conducted in the Netherlands Cohort Study and evaluated the association between consumption of nuts (sum of peanuts and tree nut), tree nuts, and peanut butter and the risk of PC overall and by sex. Despite observing lower relative risks for higher consumers compared to nonconsumers (HR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.63–1.11; p ‐trend = 0.17), none of the associations or trend tests were statistically significant …”

“…The range of total nut intake in EPIC was narrower than reported by the Netherlands Cohort Study and the Nurses' Health Study. 14,16 Lastly, there is only one dietary assessment on all EPIC participants (which was conducted at baseline), thus we were not able to evaluate changes in diet over time.…”

“…One prospective epidemiologic study from the United States found evidence for an inverse association between nut intake and PC risk in women, whereas one case–control and one prospective cohort study, both from the Netherlands, observed no statistically significant associations . A third prospective cohort study from Iran also found no clear association .…”

“…10,13 One prospective epidemiologic study from the United States found evidence for an inverse association between nut intake and PC risk in women, 14 whereas one case-control and one prospective cohort study, both from the Netherlands, observed no statistically significant associations. 15,16 A third prospective cohort study from Iran also found no clear association. 17 The purpose of the present study was to investigate the relation between the consumption of nuts and seeds and PDAC risk accounting for dietary and lifestyle factors in one of the largest prospective cohort studies of nutrition and chronic diseases.…”