Towards refining World Cancer Research Fund/American Institute for Cancer Research cancer prevention recommendations for red and processed meat intake: insights from Alberta's Tomorrow Project cohort.

Current cancer prevention recommendations advise limiting red meat intake to <500 g/week and avoiding consumption of processed meat, but do not differentiate the source of processed meat. We examined the associations of processed meat derived from red v. non-red meats with cancer risk in a prospective cohort of 26 218 adults who reported dietary intake using the Canadian Diet History Questionnaire. Incidence of cancer was obtained through data linkage with Alberta Cancer Registry with median follow-up of 13·3 (interquartile range (IQR) 5·1) years. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models were adjusted for covariates and stratified by age and sex. The median consumption (g/week) of red meat, processed meat from red meat and processed meat from non-red meat was 267·9 (IQR 269·9), 53·6 (IQR 83·3) and 11·9 (IQR 31·8), respectively. High intakes (4th Quartile) of processed meat from red meat were associated with increased risk of gastrointestinal cancer adjusted hazard ratio (AHR): 1·68 (95 % CI 1·09, 2·57) and colorectal cancers AHR: 1·90 (95 % CI 1·12, 3·22), respectively, in women. No statistically significant associations were observed for intakes of red meat or processed meat from non-red meat. Results suggest that the carcinogenic effect associated with processed meat intake may be limited to processed meat derived from red meats. The findings provide preliminary evidence towards refining cancer prevention recommendations for red and processed meat intake.

The effect of different methods to identify, and scenarios used to address energy intake misestimation on dietary patterns derived by cluster analysis.

BACKGROUND: All self-reported dietary intake data are characterized by measurement error, and validation studies indicate that the estimation of energy intake (EI) is particularly affected. METHODS: Using self-reported food frequency and physical activity data from Alberta's Tomorrow Project participants (n = 9847 men 16,241 women), we compared the revised-Goldberg and the predicted total energy expenditure methods in their ability to identify misreporters of EI. We also compared dietary patterns derived by k-means clustering under different scenarios where misreporters are included in the cluster analysis (Inclusion); excluded prior to completing the cluster analysis (ExBefore); excluded after completing the cluster analysis (ExAfter); and finally, excluded before the cluster analysis but added to the ExBefore cluster solution using the nearest neighbor method (InclusionNN). RESULTS: The predicted total energy expenditure method identified a significantly higher proportion of participants as EI misreporters compared to the revised-Goldberg method (50% vs. 47%, p < 0.0001). k-means cluster analysis identified 3 dietary patterns: Healthy, Meats/Pizza and Sweets/Dairy. Among both men and women, participants assigned to dietary patterns changed substantially between ExBefore and ExAfter and also between the Inclusion and InclusionNN scenarios (Hubert and Arabie's adjusted Rand Index, Kappa and Cramer's V statistics < 0.8). CONCLUSIONS: Different scenarios used to account for EI misreporters influenced cluster analysis and hence the composition of the dietary patterns. Continued efforts are needed to explore and validate methods and their ability to identify and mitigate the impact of EI misestimation in nutritional epidemiology.

Strategies to Address Misestimation of Energy Intake Based on Self-Report Dietary Consumption in Examining Associations Between Dietary Patterns and Cancer Risk.

The objective of this study was to determine the influence of strategies of handling misestimation of energy intake (EI) on observed associations between dietary patterns and cancer risk. Data from Alberta's Tomorrow Project participants (n = 9,847 men and 16,241 women) were linked to the Alberta Cancer Registry. The revised-Goldberg method was used to characterize EI misestimation. Four strategies assessed the influence of EI misestimation: Retaining individuals with EI misestimation in the cluster analysis (Inclusion), excluding before (ExBefore) or after cluster analysis (ExAfter), or reassigning into ExBefore clusters using the nearest neighbor method (InclusionNN). Misestimation of EI affected approximately 50% of participants. Cluster analysis identified three patterns: Healthy, Meats/Pizza and Sweets/Dairy. Cox proportional hazard regression models assessed associations between the risk of cancer and dietary patterns. Among men, no significant associations (based on an often-used threshold of p < 0.05) between dietary patterns and cancer risk were observed. In women, significant associations were observed between the Sweets/Dairy and Meats/Pizza patterns and all cancer risk in the ExBefore (HR (95% CI): 1.28 (1.04-1.58)) and InclusionNN (HR (95% CI): 1.14 (1.00-1.30)), respectively. Thus, strategies to address misestimation of EI can influence associations between dietary patterns and disease outcomes. Identifying optimal approaches for addressing EI misestimation, for example, by leveraging biomarker-based studies could improve our ability to characterize diet-disease associations.

The Comparative Reliability and Feasibility of the Past-Year Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II: Comparison of the Paper and Web Versions.

Advances in technology-enabled dietary assessment include the advent of web-based food frequency questionnaires, which may reduce costs and researcher burden but may introduce new challenges related to internet connectivity and computer literacy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the intra- and inter-version reliability, feasibility and acceptability of the paper and web Canadian Diet History Questionnaire II (CDHQ-II) in a sub-sample of 648 adults (aged 39-81 years) recruited from Alberta's Tomorrow Project. Participants were randomly assigned to one of two groups: (1) paper, web, paper; or (2) web, paper, web over a six-week period. With few exceptions, no statistically significant differences in mean nutrient intake were found in the intra- and inter-version reliability analyses. The majority of participants indicated future willingness to complete the CDHQ-II online, and 59% indicated a preference for the web over the paper version. Findings indicate that, in this population of adults drawn from an existing cohort, the CDHQ-II may be administered in paper or web modalities (increasing flexibility for questionnaire delivery), and the nutrient estimates obtained with either version are comparable. We recommend that other studies explore the feasibility and reliability of different modes of administration of dietary assessment instruments prior to widespread implementation.

Design, methods and demographics from phase I of Alberta's Tomorrow Project cohort: a prospective cohort profile.

BACKGROUND: Prospective cohorts have the potential to support multifactorial, health-related research, particularly if they are drawn from the general population, incorporate active and passive follow-up and permission is obtained to allow access by researchers to data repositories. This paper describes Phase I of the Alberta's Tomorrow Project cohort, a broad-based research platform designed to support investigations into factors that influence cancer and chronic disease risk. METHODS: Adults aged 35-69 years living in Alberta, Canada, with no previous cancer diagnosis other than nonmelanoma skin cancer were recruited to the project by telephone-based random digit dialling. Participants were enrolled if they returned a Health and Lifestyle Questionnaire. Past year diet and physical activity questionnaires were mailed 3 months after enrolment. Consent was sought for active follow-up and linkage with administrative databases. Depending on enrolment date, participants were invited to complete up to 2 follow-up questionnaires (2004 and 2008). RESULTS: Between 2001 and 2009, 31 072 (39% men) participants (mean age 50.2 [± 9.2] yr) were enrolled and 99% consented to linkage with administrative databases. Participants reported a wide range of educational attainment and household income. Compared with provincial surveillance data from the Canadian Community Health Survey, Alberta's Tomorrow Project participants had higher body mass index, lower prevalence of smoking and similar distribution of chronic health conditions. Follow-up questionnaires were completed by 83% and 72% of participants in 2004 and 2008, respectively. Robust quality control measures resulted in low frequencies of missing data. INTERPRETATION: Alberta's Tomorrow Project provides a robust platform, based on a prospective cohort design, to support research into risk factors for cancer and chronic disease.