Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Numerous observational studies have reported a strong link between dietary habits and the risk of prostate cancer. However, these studies are susceptible to confounding factors. To address this question, we conducted a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) study to explore the causal relationship between dietary habits and prostate cancer.
Methods: Genetic data for 25 different diet types were obtained from UK Biobank. Summary-level data on dietary composition and prostate cancer were obtained from a large genome-wide association study (GWAS). We employed the inverse variance weighted (IVW) for the primary analysis to examine the causal relationship between dietary components, dietary types, and prostate cancer. We also conducted sensitivity analyses using the Steiger filter, MR-Egger intercept test, Cochran's Q statistic, funnel plot, and leave-one-out analysis were used for sensitivity analysis to ensure the robustness of our findings.
Result: IVW results showed that relative fat intake (OR = 0.57, 95%CI: 0.33-1.00, P < 0.05) and canned tomato intake (OR = 0.73, 95%CI: 0.60 ~ 0.87, P < 0.01) and green bean intake (OR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.74 ~ 0.98, P = 0.03) may be protective factors for prostate cancer. In contrast, relative sugar intake (OR = 1.43, 95% CI: 1.03-2.00, P = 0.03) may increase the risk of prostate cancer.
Conclusions: Relative fat intake, green bean intake, and canned tomato intake may have a protective causal effect against prostate cancer, while relative sugar intake may increase the risk of prostate cancer. R These insights have implications for developing prevention strategies and interventions targeting dietary intake to prevent prostate cancer.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11606238 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-024-13252-z | DOI Listing |