The effect of meat consumption on cancer risk is a controversial issue. However, recent meta-analyses show that high consumers of cured meats and red meat are at increased risk of colorectal cancer. ...This increase is significant but modest (20–30%). Current WCRF-AICR recommendations are to eat no more than 500
g per week of red meat, and to avoid processed meat. Moreover, our studies show that beef meat and cured pork meat promote colon carcinogenesis in rats. The major promoter in meat is heme iron, via N-nitrosation or fat peroxidation. Dietary additives can suppress the toxic effects of heme iron. For instance, promotion of colon carcinogenesis in rats by cooked, nitrite-treated and oxidized high-heme cured meat was suppressed by dietary calcium and by α-tocopherol, and a study in volunteers supported these protective effects in humans. These additives, and others still under study, could provide an acceptable way to prevent colorectal cancer.
► High consumers of red or cured meat are at increased risk of colorectal cancer (+25%). ► Recommendations are to eat less than 500 g red meat /week and to avoid processed meat. ► Beef meat and cured pork meat promote chemically-induced colon carcinogenesis in rats. ► A major cancer promoter in meat is heme iron, via N-nitrosation or fat peroxidation. ► Some dietary additives suppress heme-induced promotion and may prevent colon cancer.
The Covid-19 coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, is inactivated much faster on paper (3 h) than on plastic (7 d). By classifying materials according to virus stability on their surface, the following list is ...obtained (from long to short stability): polypropylene (mask), plastic, glass, stainless steel, pig skin, cardboard, banknote, cotton, wood, paper, tissue, copper. These observations and other studies suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may be inactivated by dryness on water absorbent porous materials but sheltered by long-persisting micro-droplets of water on waterproof surfaces. If such physical phenomenons were confirmed by direct evidence, the persistence of the virus on any surface could be predicted, and new porous objects could be designed to eliminate the virus faster.
Processed meat intake may be involved in the etiology of colorectal cancer, a major cause of death in affluent countries. The epidemiologic studies published to date conclude that the excess risk in ...the highest category of processed meat-eaters is comprised between 20% and 50% compared with non-eaters. In addition, the excess risk per gram of intake is clearly higher than that of fresh red meat. Several hypotheses, which are mainly based on studies carried out on red meat, may explain why processed meat intake is linked to cancer risk. Those that have been tested experimentally are (i) that high-fat diets could promote carcinogenesis via insulin resistance or fecal bile acids; (ii) that cooking meat at a high temperature forms carcinogenic heterocyclic amines and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons; (iii) that carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds are formed in meat and endogenously; (iv) that heme iron in red meat can promote carcinogenesis because it increases cell proliferation in the mucosa, through lipoperoxidation and/or cytotoxicity of fecal water. Nitrosation might increase the toxicity of heme in cured products. Solving this puzzle is a challenge that would permit to reduce cancer load by changing the processes rather than by banning processed meat.
Red meat and processed meat intake is associated with a risk of colorectal cancer, a major cause of death in affluent countries. Epidemiological and experimental evidence supports the hypothesis that ...heme iron present in meat promotes colorectal cancer. This meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies of colon cancer reporting heme intake included 566,607 individuals and 4,734 cases of colon cancer. The relative risk of colon cancer was 1.18 (95% CI: 1.06-1.32) for subjects in the highest category of heme iron intake compared with those in the lowest category. Epidemiological data thus show a suggestive association between dietary heme and risk of colon cancer. The analysis of experimental studies in rats with chemically-induced colon cancer showed that dietary hemoglobin and red meat consistently promote aberrant crypt foci, a putative precancer lesion. The mechanism is not known, but heme iron has a catalytic effect on (i) the endogenous formation of carcinogenic N-nitroso compounds and (ii) the formation of cytotoxic and genotoxic aldehydes by lipoperoxidation. A review of evidence supporting these hypotheses suggests that both pathways are involved in heme iron toxicity.
This paper is based on a workshop held in Oslo, Norway in November 2013, in which experts discussed how to reach consensus on the healthiness of red and processed meat. Recent nutritional ...recommendations include reducing intake of red and processed meat to reduce cancer risk, in particular colorectal cancer (CRC). Epidemiological and mechanistic data on associations between red and processed meat intake and CRC are inconsistent and underlying mechanisms are unclear. There is a need for further studies on differences between white and red meat, between processed and whole red meat and between different types of processed meats, as potential health risks may not be the same for all products. Better biomarkers of meat intake and of cancer occurrence and updated food composition databases are required for future studies. Modifying meat composition via animal feeding and breeding, improving meat processing by alternative methods such as adding phytochemicals and improving our diets in general are strategies that need to be followed up.
Tumours in rodent and human colon share many histological and genetic features. To know if rodent models of colon carcinogenesis are good predictors of chemopreventive efficacy in humans, we ...conducted a meta-analysis of aspirin, β-carotene, calcium, and wheat bran studies. Controlled intervention studies of adenoma recurrence in human volunteers were compared with chemoprevention studies of carcinogen-induced tumours in rats, and of polyps in Min (
Apc(+/−)) mice: 6714 volunteers, 3911 rats and 458 mice were included in the meta-analyses. Difference between models was small since most global relative risks were between 0.76 and 1.00. A closer look showed that carcinogen-induced rat studies matched human trials for aspirin, calcium, carotene, and were compatible for wheat bran. Min mice results were compatible with human results for aspirin, but discordant for calcium and wheat bran (no carotene study). These few results suggest that rodent models roughly predict effect in humans, but the prediction is not accurate for all agents. Based on three cases only, the carcinogen-induced rat model seems better than the Min mouse model. However, rodent studies are useful to screen potential chemopreventive agents, and to study mechanisms of carcinogenesis and chemoprevention.
Abstract
Smith et al. (Env. Health Perspect. 124: 713, 2016) identified 10 key characteristics (KCs), one or more of which are commonly exhibited by established human carcinogens. The KCs reflect the ...properties of a cancer-causing agent, such as ‘is genotoxic,’ ‘is immunosuppressive’ or ‘modulates receptor-mediated effects,’ and are distinct from the hallmarks of cancer, which are the properties of tumors. To assess feasibility and limitations of applying the KCs to diverse agents, methods and results of mechanistic data evaluations were compiled from eight recent IARC Monograph meetings. A systematic search, screening and evaluation procedure identified a broad literature encompassing multiple KCs for most (12/16) IARC Group 1 or 2A carcinogens identified in these meetings. Five carcinogens are genotoxic and induce oxidative stress, of which pentachlorophenol, hydrazine and malathion also showed additional KCs. Four others, including welding fumes, are immunosuppressive. The overall evaluation was upgraded to Group 2A based on mechanistic data for only two agents, tetrabromobisphenol A and tetrachloroazobenzene. Both carcinogens modulate receptor-mediated effects in combination with other KCs. Fewer studies were identified for Group 2B or 3 agents, with the vast majority (17/18) showing only one or no KCs. Thus, an objective approach to identify and evaluate mechanistic studies pertinent to cancer revealed strong evidence for multiple KCs for most Group 1 or 2A carcinogens but also identified opportunities for improvement. Further development and mapping of toxicological and biomarker endpoints and pathways relevant to the KCs can advance the systematic search and evaluation of mechanistic data in carcinogen hazard identification.
The use of the KCs of carcinogens provides an objective approach to identify and evaluate mechanistic studies pertinent to cancer induction. Analysis of data from eight recent IARC Monograph meetings revealed strong evidence for multiple KCs for most Group 1 or 2A known and probable human carcinogens.
The Apc(Min/+) mouse model and the azoxymethane (AOM) rat model are the main animal models used to study the effect of dietary agents on colorectal cancer. We reviewed recently the potency of ...chemopreventive agents in the AOM rat model (D. E. Corpet and S. Tache, Nutr. Cancer, 43: 1-21, 2002). Here we add the results of a systematic review of the effect of dietary and chemopreventive agents on the tumor yield in Min mice. The review is based on the results of 179 studies from 71 articles and is displayed also on the internet http://corpet.net/min.(2) We compared the efficacy of agents in the Min mouse model and the AOM rat model, and found that they were correlated (r = 0.66; P < 0.001), although some agents that afford strong protection in the AOM rat and the Min mouse small bowel increase the tumor yield in the large bowel of mutant mice. The agents included piroxicam, sulindac, celecoxib, difluoromethylornithine, and polyethylene glycol. The reason for this discrepancy is not known. We also compare the results of rodent studies with those of clinical intervention studies of polyp recurrence. We found that the effect of most of the agents tested was consistent across the animal and clinical models. Our point is thus: rodent models can provide guidance in the selection of prevention approaches to human colon cancer, in particular they suggest that polyethylene glycol, hesperidin, protease inhibitor, sphingomyelin, physical exercise, epidermal growth factor receptor kinase inhibitor, (+)-catechin, resveratrol, fish oil, curcumin, caffeate, and thiosulfonate are likely important preventive agents.
Epidemiology shows that red and processed meat intake is associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer. Heme iron, heterocyclic amines, and endogenous N-nitroso compounds (NOC) are proposed ...to explain this effect, but their relative contribution is unknown. Our study aimed at determining, at nutritional doses, which is the main factor involved and proposing a mechanism of cancer promotion by red meat. The relative part of heme iron (1% in diet), heterocyclic amines (PhIP + MeIQx, 50 + 25 μg/kg in diet), and NOC (induced by NaNO₂+ NaNO₂; 0.17 + 0.23 g/L of drinking water) was determined by a factorial design and preneoplastic endpoints in chemically induced rats and validated on tumors in Min mice. The molecular mechanisms (genotoxicity, cytotoxicity) were analyzed in vitro in normal and Apc-deficient cell lines and confirmed on colon mucosa. Heme iron increased the number of preneoplastic lesions, but dietary heterocyclic amines and NOC had no effect on carcinogenesis in rats. Dietary hemoglobin increased tumor load in Min mice (control diet: 67 ± 39 mm²; 2.5% hemoglobin diet: 114 ± 47 mm², P = 0.004). In vitro, fecal water from rats given hemoglobin was rich in aldehydes and was cytotoxic to normal cells, but not to premalignant cells. The aldehydes 4-hydroxynonenal and 4-hydroxyhexenal were more toxic to normal versus mutated cells and were only genotoxic to normal cells. Genotoxicity was also observed in colon mucosa of mice given hemoglobin. These results highlight the role of heme iron in the promotion of colon cancer by red meat and suggest that heme iron could initiate carcinogenesis through lipid peroxidation. .
Potential chemopreventive agents for colorectal cancer are assessed in rodents. We speculated that the magnitude of the effect is meaningful and ranked all published agents according to their ...potency. Data were gathered systematically from 137 articles with the aberrant crypt foci (ACF) end point and from 146 articles with the tumor end point. The potency of each agent to reduce the number of ACF is listed in one table and the potency of each agent to reduce the tumor incidence in another table. Both tables are shown in this review and on a website with sorting abilities (http://www.inra.fr/reseau-nacre/sci-memb/corpet/indexan.html). Potency was estimated as the ratio of the value in control rats to the value in treated rats. From each article, only the most potent agent was kept, except in articles reporting the effect of more than seven agents. Among the 186 agents in the ACF table, the median agent reduced the number of ACF by one-half. The most potent agents to reduce azoxymethane-induced ACF were Pluronic, polyethylene glycol, perilla oil with β-carotene, and sulindac sulfide. Among the 160 agents in the tumor table, the median agent reduced the tumor incidence in rats by one-half. The most potent agents to reduce the incidence of azoxymethane-induced tumors were celecoxib, a protease inhibitor from soy, difluoromethylornithine with piroxicam, polyethylene glycol, and a thiosulfonate. For the 57 agents present in both tables, a significant correlation (r) was found between the potencies against ACF and tumors (r = 0.45, P < 0.001); without celecoxib, a major outlying point in the correlation, r = 0.68 (P < 0.001, n = 56). In conclusion, this review gathers most known chemopreventive agents, ranks the most promising agents against colon carcinogenesis in rats or mice, and further supports the use of ACF as a surrogate end point for tumors in rats.
PDF
