activity, red meat intake, smoking habits, study centre, treatment allocation Table Glycemic load and colorectal cancer risk. Main characteristics of studies excluded from the CUP SLR dose-response analysis Cases/ Author, Year, name, Study size Case Exposure RR (95%CI) Adjustment WCRF Code, Outcome Comparison characteristics Follow-up ascertainment assessment Ptrend factors Country (years) Michaud, 2005 NHS-HPFS, 1 096/ Incidence, Self-report, 1.08 (0.87-1.34) FFQ 81 vs 65 COL01824 Prospective 130 719 colorectal medical record Ptrend:0.27 USA 20 Cohort, years cancer, women and pathology 0.89 (0.71-1.11) M/W report reviewed 167 vs 80 Ptrend:0.15 by centrally trained 858/ Incidence, colon 1.06 (0.83-1.36) 81 vs 65 physician cancer, women Ptrend:0.29 0.89 (0.69-1.15) 167 vs 80 Ptrend:0.11 683/ Incidence, 1.14 (0.88-1.48) 82 vs 69 colorectal Ptrend:0.33 cancer, men 1.32 (0.98-1.79) 223 vs 131 Ptrend:0.04
activity, red meat intake, smoking habits, study centre, treatment allocation Table Glycemic load and colorectal cancer risk. Main characteristics of studies excluded from the CUP SLR dose-response Author, Year, WCRF Code, Country name, characteristics Cases/ Study size Follow-up (years) Case ascertainment Exposure assessment Outcome Comparison RR (95%CI) Ptrend Adjustment factors Michaud, 2005 COL01824 USA NHS-HPFS, Prospective Cohort, M/W 1 096/ 130 719 20 years Self-report, medical record and pathology report reviewed by centrally trained physician FFQ Incidence, colorectal cancer, women 81 vs 65 1.08 (0.87-1.34) Ptrend:0.27 167 vs 80 0.89 (0.71-1.11) Ptrend:0.15 858/ Incidence, colon cancer, women 81 vs 65 1.06 (0.83-1.36) Ptrend:0.29 167 vs 80 0.89 (0.69-1.15) Ptrend:0.11 683/ Incidence, colorectal cancer, men 82 vs 69 1.14 (0.88-1.48) Ptrend:0.33 223 vs 131 1.32 (0.98-1.79) Ptrend:0.04 analysis
CUP_colorectal_SLR_2016_RO.docx