GO TO CMA Home
GO TO Inside CMA
GO TO Advocacy and Communications
GO TO Member Services
GO TO Publications
GO TO Professional Development
GO TO Clinical Resources

GO TO What's New
GO TO Contact CMA
GO TO Web Site Search
GO TO Web Site Map


CMAJ
CMAJ - October 6, 1998JAMC - le 6 octobre 1998

Prostate cancer: 3. Individual risk factors

Appendix 1: Studies of dietary fat and prostate cancer
  No. of subjects  
Place of study Diagnosis period Type of study Cases Controls Source of fat (intake) Summary RR (and 95% CI) in highest exposure group
Japan19 1966–1975 Cohort   63   Meat 0.9 (NS)
New York20 1957–1965 Case–control  311  294 Total fat 2.04 (CI not given, p < 0.05)
Kyoto, Japan21 1981–1984 Case–control  100  100 Total fat 1.33 (NS, p > 0.05)
Washington, DC22 1982–1984 Case–control   55   55 Total fat No difference, RR not given
California23 1977–1980 Case–control  142  142 Total fat 1.9 (CI not given, p < 0.05)
Hawaii24 1977–1983 Case–control  452  899 Saturated fat 1.70 (1.0–2.8)
New York25 1982–1988 Case–control  371  371 Annual fat 1.26 (0.76–2.07)
Hawaii26 1965–1986 Cohort  174 Saturated fat 1.00 (0.75–1.60)
California27 1976–1982 Cohort  180 Beef 1.21 (0.83–1.75)
Minnesota28 1966–1986 Cohort  149 Meat 0.8 (0.5–1.3)
Utah29 1984–1985 Case–control  358  679 Total fat Aggressive cases 2.9 (1.0–8.4)
US30 1986–1990 Cohort  300 Total fat
Red meat
Advanced cases 1.79 (1.04–3.07)
Advanced cases 2.6 (1.21–5.77)
Sweden31 1989–1992 Case–control  256  252 Total fat 0.7 (0.4–1.1)
US and Canada32 1987–1991 Case–control 1655 1645 Saturated fat Aggressive cases 2.8 (1.5–5.2)
Ontario33 1990–1992 Case–control  207  207 Total fat 0.7 (0.4–1.3)
Serbia34 1990–1994 Case–control  101  202 Total fat 1.95 (0.68–5.57)
Note: RR = relative risk, CI = confidence interval, NS = not significant.

[Return to text]