Table Fruit intake and colorectal cancer risk. Results of meta-analyses and pooled analyses of prospective studies published after the 2005 SLR. Heterogeneity Author, Number of Studies number of Outcome Comparison RR (95%CI) P trend Year studies country, area (I2, p value) cases Meta-analyses Huxley et al, 8 CC 2651 CC Incidence/ High vs. Low 0.99 (0.90-1.08) - 25%, p=0.11 2009 6 RC 1005 RC mortality 0.78 (0.63-0.97) - NA 8 CRC 7916 CRC Europe, Asia 1.01 (0.86-1.18) - NA Aune et al, 14 CRC 14876 North Incidence High vs. low 0.90 (0.83-0.98) - 41.6%, p=0.05 2012 13 America, Per 100 g/d 0.98 (0.94-1.01) - 64%, p=0.001 11 CC Europe, Asia High vs. low 0.89 (0.81-0.97) - 30.2%, p=0.16 7 RC High vs. low 0.91 (0.76-1.09) - 45.2%, p=0.09 Pooled analyses Koushik, 14 5838 CC North Incidence Quintile 5 vs. 1 0.93 (0.85-1.02) 0.28 NA, p=0.62 2007 America, vs. <100 ≥400 Europe g/d 0.87 (0.77-0.97) 0.04 NA, p=0.90
Table Fruit intake and colorectal cancer risk. Results of meta-analyses and pooled analyses of prospective studies published after the 2005 SLR. Author, Year Number of studies number of cases Studies country, area Outcome Comparison RR (95%CI) P trend Heterogeneity (I2, p value) Meta-analyses Huxley et al, 2009 8 CC 6 RC 8 CRC 2651 CC 1005 RC 7916 CRC Europe, Asia Incidence/ mortality High vs. Low 0.99 (0.90-1.08) 0.78 (0.63-0.97) 1.01 (0.86-1.18) - - - 25%, p=0.11 NA NA Aune et al, 2012 14 CRC 13 11 CC 7 RC 14876 North America, Europe, Asia Incidence High vs. low Per 100 g/d High vs. low High vs. low 0.90 (0.83-0.98) 0.98 (0.94-1.01) 0.89 (0.81-0.97) 0.91 (0.76-1.09) - - - - 41.6%, p=0.05 64%, p=0.001 30.2%, p=0.16 45.2%, p=0.09 Pooled analyses Koushik, 2007 14 5838 CC North America, Europe Incidence Quintile 5 vs. 1 ≥400 vs. <100 g/d 0.93 (0.85-1.02) 0.87 (0.77-0.97) 0.28 0.04 NA, p=0.62 NA, p=0.90
CUP_colorectal_SLR_2016_RO.docx