The DOI matches its Crossref record; 68 of the 71 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 23 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Fiber Intake and Survival After Colorectal Cancer Diagnosis
Open accessAbstract
IMPORTANCE: Although high dietary fiber intake has been associated with a lower risk of colorectal cancer (CRC), it remains unknown whether fiber benefits CRC survivors. OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of postdiagnostic fiber intake with mortality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1575 health care professionals with stage I to III CRC were evaluated in 2 prospective cohorts, Nurses' Health Study and Health Professionals Follow-up Study. Colorectal cancer-specific and overall mortality were determined after adjusting for other potential predictors for cancer survival. The study was conducted from December 23, 2016, to August 23, 2017. EXPOSURES: Consumption of total fiber and different sources of fiber and whole grains assessed by a validated food frequency questionnaire between 6 months and 4 years after CRC diagnosis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs of CRC-specific and overall mortality after adjusting for other potential predictors for cancer survival. RESULTS: Of the 1575 participants, 963 (61.1%) were women; mean (SD) age was 68.6 (8.9) years. During a median of 8 years of follow-up, 773 deaths were documented, including 174 from CRC. High intake of total fiber after diagnosis was associated with lower mortality. The multivariable HR per each 5-g increment in intake per day was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.65-0.93; P = .006) for CRC-specific mortality and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.93; P < .001) for all-cause mortality. Patients who increased their fiber intake after diagnosis from levels before diagnosis had a lower mortality, and each 5-g/d increase in intake was associated with 18% lower CRC-specific mortality (95% CI, 7%-28%; P = .002) and 14% lower all-cause mortality (95% CI, 8%-19%; P < .001). According to the source of fiber, cereal fiber was associated with lower CRC-specific mortality (HR per 5-g/d increment, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.50-0.90; P = .007) and all-cause mortality (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.68-0.90; P < .001); vegetable fiber was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.72-0.96; P = .009) but not CRC-specific mortality (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.60-1.13; P = .22); no association was found for fruit fiber. Whole grain intake was associated with lower CRC-specific mortality (HR per 20-g/d increment, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59-0.88; P = .002), and this beneficial association was attenuated after adjusting for fiber intake (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.62-0.96; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Higher fiber intake after the diagnosis of nonmetastatic CRC is associated with lower CRC-specific and overall mortality. Increasing fiber consumption after diagnosis may confer additional benefits to patients with CRC.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
38 Own result · 12 Sources not found · 11 Own method · 7 Own interpretation · 1 Not checked yet
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similar findings were obtained when cumulative average fiber consumption after diagnosis was used for the analysis (eTable 2).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similar results were also obtained in the propensity score analysis, with the corresponding HRs of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67-0.96, P for trend=0.02) and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.93, P for trend<0.001), respectively, indicating the robustness of our findings to confounding.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For all-cause mortality, a statistically significant nonlinear relationship was observed (P=0.007); the benefit associated with increasing fiber intake achieved its maximum at about 24 g/day and no further reduction in mortality was found beyond this level of intake (Figure 1).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Vegetable fiber was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR per 5-g/day increment, 0.83, 95% CI, 0.72-0.96, P for trend=0.009) but not CRC-specific mortality (HR, 0.82, 95% CI, 0.60-1.13, P for trend=0.22).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake of different food sources and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No other statistically significant interaction was detected.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake and survival within subgroups
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The HR associated with 5-g/day increment in cereal fiber was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.50-0.90, P for trend=0.007) for CRC-specific mortality and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.68-0.90, P for trend<0.001) for all-cause mortality.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake of different food sources and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similar results were also obtained in the propensity score analysis, with the corresponding HRs of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67-0.96, P for trend=0.02) and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.93, P for trend<0.001), respectively, indicating the robustness of our findings to confounding.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The multivariable HR per each 5-g increase in intake per day was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.65-0.93, P=0.006) for CRC-specific mortality and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.93, P<0.001) for all-cause mortality.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Vegetable fiber was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR per 5-g/day increment, 0.83, 95% CI, 0.72-0.96, P for trend=0.009) but not CRC-specific mortality (HR, 0.82, 95% CI, 0.60-1.13, P for trend=0.22).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake of different food sources and survival
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We observed a statistically significant interaction with alcohol consumption for CRC-specific mortality (P=0.05) and with regular aspirin use for all-cause mortality (P=0.01): the inverse association of fiber intake with mortality was restricted to low alcohol consumer and non-regular aspirin users.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake and survival within subgroups
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 1, fiber intake was inversely associated with CRC-specific mortality after adjusting for other potential determinants for cancer prognosis.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No statistically significant interaction was detected between fiber intake and tumor subsite or stage (P for interaction>0.05) (eTable 3).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 1, patients who increased their fiber intake after diagnosis from levels before diagnosis had a lower mortality and each 5-g/day increase in fiber intake was associated with 18% lower CRC-specific mortality (95% CI, 7-28%, P=0.002) and 14% lower all-cause mortality (95% CI, 8-19%, P<0.001).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Change in total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results remained essentially unchanged, with the multivariable HR per 5-g/day increment for CRC-specific mortality of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.66-0.97, P for trend=0.02) and the HR for all-cause mortality of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.78-0.93, P for trend=0.002).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 1, patients who increased their fiber intake after diagnosis from levels before diagnosis had a lower mortality and each 5-g/day increase in fiber intake was associated with 18% lower CRC-specific mortality (95% CI, 7-28%, P=0.002) and 14% lower all-cause mortality (95% CI, 8-19%, P<0.001).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Change in total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We observed a statistically significant interaction with alcohol consumption for CRC-specific mortality (P=0.05) and with regular aspirin use for all-cause mortality (P=0.01): the inverse association of fiber intake with mortality was restricted to low alcohol consumer and non-regular aspirin users.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake and survival within subgroups
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This association was attenuated after adjusting for total fiber intake (HR=0.77, 95% CI, 0.62-0.96, P for trend=0.02).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Whole grain intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 1, patients who increased their fiber intake after diagnosis from levels before diagnosis had a lower mortality and each 5-g/day increase in fiber intake was associated with 18% lower CRC-specific mortality (95% CI, 7-28%, P=0.002) and 14% lower all-cause mortality (95% CI, 8-19%, P<0.001).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Change in total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results remained essentially unchanged, with the multivariable HR per 5-g/day increment for CRC-specific mortality of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.66-0.97, P for trend=0.02) and the HR for all-cause mortality of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.78-0.93, P for trend=0.002).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Anatomic subsite and grade of differentiation did not differ across quartiles of fiber intake, whereas patients with the highest fiber intake were more likely to have stage I cancer than others.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Basic characteristics of participants
plaincorrelationaln = 1,575- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For all-cause mortality, a statistically significant nonlinear relationship was observed (P=0.007); the benefit associated with increasing fiber intake achieved its maximum at about 24 g/day and no further reduction in mortality was found beyond this level of intake (Figure 1).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The HR associated with 5-g/day increment in cereal fiber was 0.67 (95% CI, 0.50-0.90, P for trend=0.007) for CRC-specific mortality and 0.78 (95% CI, 0.68-0.90, P for trend<0.001) for all-cause mortality.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake of different food sources and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Whole grain consumption was associated with lower CRC-specific mortality, with the multivariable HR per 20-g/day increment of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.59-0.88, P for trend=0.002) (Table 3).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Whole grain intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The multivariable HR per each 5-g increase in intake per day was 0.78 (95% CI, 0.65-0.93, P=0.006) for CRC-specific mortality and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.93, P<0.001) for all-cause mortality.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similar, but weaker, attenuation was observed for all-cause mortality, with the HR changing from 0.88 (95% CI, 0.80-0.97, P for trend=0.008) to 0.91 (0.83-1.01, P for trend=0.08) after including fiber in the multivariable model.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Whole grain intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similar, but weaker, attenuation was observed for all-cause mortality, with the HR changing from 0.88 (95% CI, 0.80-0.97, P for trend=0.008) to 0.91 (0.83-1.01, P for trend=0.08) after including fiber in the multivariable model.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Whole grain intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We observed a statistically significant interaction with alcohol consumption for CRC-specific mortality (P=0.05) and with regular aspirin use for all-cause mortality (P=0.01): the inverse association of fiber intake with mortality was restricted to low alcohol consumer and non-regular aspirin users.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake and survival within subgroups
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As shown in Table 2, fiber from cereals showed an inverse association with lower mortality after mutual adjustment for fruit and vegetable fiber.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake of different food sources and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The spline analysis showed a linear relationship between fiber intake after diagnosis and CRC-specific mortality.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Fiber intakes from these sources were weakly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient r<0.25, eTable 4).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake of different food sources and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Similar results were also obtained in the propensity score analysis, with the corresponding HRs of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.67-0.96, P for trend=0.02) and 0.86 (95% CI, 0.79-0.93, P for trend<0.001), respectively, indicating the robustness of our findings to confounding.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Second, beyond cause of mortality, data on cancer recurrences were unavailable in our cohorts.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Emerging, albeit limited, evidence suggests that hyperinsulinemia and markers of insulin resistance and inflammation predict worse survival in CRC patients,38,39 and may mediate the adverse metabolic effect of obesity and physical inactivity on CRC recurrence and death.23,40”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [23] Meyerhardt JA Giovannucci EL Ogino S Physical activity and male colorectal cancer survival Arch Intern Med 2009 169 22 2102 2108 20008694 PMC2852183
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [40] Cespedes Feliciano EM Kroenke CH Meyerhardt JA Metabolic Dysfunction, Obesity, and Survival Among Patients With Early-Stage Colorectal Cancer J Clin Oncol 2016 PMC5065112 27601537
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“According to a recent meta-analysis of 25 prospective studies, each 10-gram increment in daily intake of total and cereal fiber was associated with approximately 10% lowered risk of developing CRC.31”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [31] Aune D Chan DS Lau R Dietary fibre, whole grains, and risk of colorectal cancer: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies BMJ 2011 343 d6617 22074852 PMC3213242
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
In the paper
“Nevertheless, because the median survival for metastatic CRC was approximately 10 to 12 months during much of the period of this study,59 CRC-specific mortality should be a reasonable surrogate for cancer-specific outcomes.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [59] Meyerhardt JA Mayer RJ Systemic therapy for colorectal cancer N Engl J Med 2005 352 5 476 487 15689586
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Third, the number of CRC-specific deaths is relatively small, and therefore further large-scale studies are needed.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, the detailed covariate data collected in parallel with fiber intake allowed for rigorous control for confounding by various predictors of cancer survival.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Substantial evidence supports the protective effect of high fiber intake for CRC prevention.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [31] Aune D Chan DS Lau R Dietary fibre, whole grains, and risk of colorectal cancer: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies BMJ 2011 343 d6617 22074852 PMC3213242
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, detailed treatment data were largely unavailable in the cohorts.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our findings provide novel evidence for the potential benefit of increasing fiber and whole grain consumption among CRC patients.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, higher fiber intake after CRC diagnosis may improve patients’ survival by mitigating the tumor-promoting effect of hyperinsulinemia and inflammation.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Bacterial fermentation of fiber also produces butyrate, which has been increasingly implicated in modulation of the tumor microenvironment.41”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [41] Encarnacao JC Abrantes AM Pires AS Botelho MF Revisit dietary fiber on colorectal cancer: butyrate and its role on prevention and treatment Cancer Metastasis Rev 2015 34 3 465 478 26224132
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Advantages of the current study include the prospective design, detailed collection of pre- and post-diagnostic diet and lifestyle information, standardized medical record review of self-reported CRC and deaths, and long-term follow-up.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thus, our ability to control for stage in our analyses minimized any potential confounding by treatment.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: During the study period, adjuvant treatment was largely standardized and primarily correlated with disease stage.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Moreover, butyrate may influence CRC prognosis by modulating the function of tumor-infiltrating immune cells, including regulatory T cells42,43 and macrophages,44 which have been increasingly recognized for their critical roles in tumor-host interactions and cancer prognosis.45,46”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [42] Smith PM Howitt MR Panikov N The microbial metabolites, short-chain fatty acids, regulate colonic Treg cell homeostasis Science 2013 341 6145 569 573 23828891 PMC3807819
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [43] Arpaia N Campbell C Fan X Metabolites produced by commensal bacteria promote peripheral regulatory T-cell generation Nature 2013 504 7480 451 455 24226773 PMC3869884
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [44] Chang PV Hao L Offermanns S Medzhitov R The microbial metabolite butyrate regulates intestinal macrophage function via histone deacetylase inhibition Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2014 111 6 2247 2252 24390544 PMC3926023
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Emerging, albeit limited, evidence suggests that hyperinsulinemia and markers of insulin resistance and inflammation predict worse survival in CRC patients,38,39 and may mediate the adverse metabolic effect of obesity and physical inactivity on CRC recurrence and death.23,40”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [38] Volkova E Willis JA Wells JE Robinson BA Dachs GU Currie MJ Association of angiopoietin-2, C-reactive protein and markers of obesity and insulin resistance with survival outcome in colorectal cancer Br J Cancer 2011 104 1 51 59 21081932 PMC3039823
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [39] Wolpin BM Meyerhardt JA Chan AT Insulin, the insulin-like growth factor axis, and mortality in patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer J Clin Oncol 2009 27 2 176 185 19064975 PMC2645084
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, because all participants were health professionals, any difference in access to adjuvant chemotherapy is minimized.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Advantages of the current study include the prospective design, detailed collection of pre- and post-diagnostic diet and lifestyle information, standardized medical record review of self-reported CRC and deaths, and long-term follow-up.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Advantages of the current study include the prospective design, detailed collection of pre- and post-diagnostic diet and lifestyle information, standardized medical record review of self-reported CRC and deaths, and long-term follow-up.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 10
- Probably not a substantial claim. 8
- The quote only partly states this claim. 2
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The overall 5-year survival rates were 83% (95% CI, 79-86%) for stage I cancer, 82% (95% CI, 78-86%) for stage II cancer, and 72% (95% CI, 67-76%) for stage III cancer.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Basic characteristics of participants
plainn = 1,575- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Pre- and post-diagnostic intake of fiber was modestly correlated (Spearman correlation coefficient r=0.58).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Change in total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Among 1,575 eligible patients diagnosed with stage I to III CRC, we documented 773 deaths, of which 174 were classified as CRC-specific deaths over a median of 8 years of follow-up.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Basic characteristics of participants
plainn = 1,575- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In a subset of patients with chemotherapy data (n=375), fiber intake was similar among those who received chemotherapy (median=19.5 g/day) versus those who did not (median=19.1 g/day) (P for Wilcoxon test =0.13).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plainn = 375- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Participants with higher fiber intake tended to have a healthier lifestyle (eTable 1).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Basic characteristics of participants
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Anatomic subsite and grade of differentiation did not differ across quartiles of fiber intake, whereas patients with the highest fiber intake were more likely to have stage I cancer than others.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Basic characteristics of participants
plainn = 1,575- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For all-cause mortality, a statistically significant nonlinear relationship was observed (P=0.007); the benefit associated with increasing fiber intake achieved its maximum at about 24 g/day and no further reduction in mortality was found beyond this level of intake (Figure 1).”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Total fiber intake after diagnosis and survival
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, no association was found for fruit fiber.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake of different food sources and survival
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Advantages of the current study include the prospective design, detailed collection of pre- and post-diagnostic diet and lifestyle information, standardized medical record review of self-reported CRC and deaths, and long-term follow-up.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“This agrees with the well-established data from animal studies that high-fiber diets promote apoptosis and suppress colorectal tumor development.32–34”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [32] Avivi-Green C Polak-Charcon S Madar Z Schwartz B Dietary regulation and localization of apoptosis cascade proteins in the colonic crypt J Cell Biochem 2000 77 1 18 29 10679813
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [33] Fleiszer D Murray D MacFarlane J Brown RA Protective effect of dietary fibre against chemically induced bowel tumours in rats Lancet 1978 2 8089 552 553 79919
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [34] Cao Y Gao X Zhang W Dietary fiber enhances TGF-beta signaling and growth inhibition in the gut Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2011 301 1 G156 164 21454444 PMC3129933
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Higher consumption of whole grains was also associated with better survival, and this beneficial association was partly mediated by fiber.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Although butyrate is a major energy source for normal colonocytes, it is metabolized to a lesser extent in cancer cells due to the Warburg effect and accumulates in the nucleus of cancerous colonocytes, in which it functions as an inhibitor of histone deacetylase to epigenetically regulate expression of numerous genes responsible for tumor growth, angiogenesis, migration, and chemoresistance.41”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [41] Encarnacao JC Abrantes AM Pires AS Botelho MF Revisit dietary fiber on colorectal cancer: butyrate and its role on prevention and treatment Cancer Metastasis Rev 2015 34 3 465 478 26224132
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In conclusion, higher intake of fiber and whole grains after CRC diagnosis is associated with lower rate of death from that disease and other causes.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“However, in the current study, adjusting for fiber intake indeed attenuated the association between whole grain and lower mortality, suggesting that fiber may be an important contributor for the protective effect of whole grains.58”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [58] Larsson SC Giovannucci E Bergkvist L Wolk A Whole grain consumption and risk of colorectal cancer: a population-based cohort of 60,000 women Br J Cancer 2005 92 9 1803 1807 15827552 PMC2362029
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our current study adds to the existing literature and suggests that the effect of high fiber intake may extend beyond protection against cancer incidence and contribute to better prognosis after cancer is established.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Our findings provide support for the nutritional recommendations of maintaining sufficient fiber intake among CRC survivors.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Higher intake of fiber, especially cereal fiber, has been linked to improved insulin sensitivity,35 lipid profile,36 endothelial function, and reduced inflammation.37”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [35] Weickert MO Mohlig M Schofl C Cereal fiber improves whole-body insulin sensitivity in overweight and obese women Diabetes Care 2006 29 4 775 780 16567814
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [36] Davy BM Davy KP Ho RC Beske SD Davrath LR Melby CL High-fiber oat cereal compared with wheat cereal consumption favorably alters LDL-cholesterol subclass and particle numbers in middle-aged and older men Am J Clin Nutr 2002 76 2 351 358 12145006
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not checked yetcites [37] Qi L van Dam RM Liu S Franz M Mantzoros C Hu FB Whole-grain, bran, and cereal fiber intakes and markers of systemic inflammation in diabetic women Diabetes Care 2006 29 2 207 211 16443861
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Not matched
In the paper
“These rates appeared to be comparable to national estimates.30”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Basic characteristics of participants
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [30] SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2013 National Cancer Institute 2016 https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2013/. Accessed August 02, 2017
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
hedgedn = 1,575- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Finally, as an observational study, residual confounding cannot be excluded, although we observed similar results through multivariable adjustment and propensity score analysis.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim could be matched to a paper in Crossref, so there is nothing to check it against.
In the paper
“Of note, previous observational data regarding the favorable influence of other lifestyle factors on CRC survival have been subsequently confirmed in randomized trials.”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites [60] Schmid D Leitzmann MF Association between physical activity and mortality among breast cancer and colorectal cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis Ann Oncol 2014 25 7 1293 1311 24644304
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [61] Maalmi H Ordonez-Mena JM Schottker B Brenner H Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels and survival in colorectal and breast cancer patients: systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies Eur J Cancer 2014 50 8 1510 1521 24582912
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Not matchedcites [62] Song M Zhang X Meyerhardt JA Marine omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis Gut 2016 PMC5247396 27436272
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Not matched
The authors state this as an assumption.
Before this study, no prior study had examined the association between fiber intake and survival among colorectal cancer patients.
“Despite these data, to our knowledge no study has yet examined the association between fiber intake and survival of CRC patients.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
This study is the first prospective study to examine the prognostic influence of fiber intake among colorectal cancer patients.
“To our knowledge, this is the first prospective study examining the prognostic influence of fiber intake among CRC patients.”
The paper relies on this without support.
During the study period, adjuvant treatment was largely standardized and primarily correlated with disease stage.
“Moreover, during the time period of the study, adjuvant treatment was largely standardized and primarily correlated with disease stage.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Higher intake of nutrients such as fiber,199 marine omega-3 fatty acid,200–202 vitamin D,203–205 or calcium,203 or coffee206, 207 or a plant-based low-carbohydrate diet207 has been associated with increased survival times of patients with CRC.”
From Influence of the Gut Microbiome, Diet, and Environment on Risk of Colorectal Cancer (2020) · cites this paper as [199]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > Abstract > Results
“vegetable fiber was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR, 0.83, 95% CI, 0.72-0.96, P=0.009) but not CRC-specific mortality (HR, 0.82, 95% CI, 0.60-1.13, P=0.12)”
§ Fiber intake and survival after colorectal cancer diagnosis > RESULTS > Fiber intake of different food sources and survival
“Vegetable fiber was associated with lower all-cause mortality (HR per 5-g/day increment, 0.83, 95% CI, 0.72-0.96, P for trend=0.009) but not CRC-specific mortality (HR, 0.82, 95% CI, 0.60-1.13, P for trend=0.22).”
Citations
Cites
The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects
ROSENBAUM, P. R., & RUBIN, D. B. (1983) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/70.1.41 · Cited by 31,241
Siegel, R. L., Miller, K. D., & Jemal, A. (2016) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21332 · Cited by 16,003
Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2016
Miller, K. D., Siegel, R. L., Lin, C. C., Mariotto, A. B., Kramer, J. L., Rowland, J. H., Stein, K. D., Alteri, R., & Jemal, A. (2016) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/caac.21349 · Cited by 6,066
The Microbial Metabolites, Short-Chain Fatty Acids, Regulate Colonic T reg Cell Homeostasis
Smith, P. M., Howitt, M. R., Panikov, N., Michaud, M., Gallini, C. A., Bohlooly-Y, M., Glickman, J. N., & Garrett, W. S. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1241165 · Cited by 5,413
The immune contexture in human tumours: impact on clinical outcome
Fridman, W. H., Pagès, F., Sautès-Fridman, C., & Galon, J. (2012) · Nature reviews. Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc3245 · Cited by 4,981
Metabolites produced by commensal bacteria promote peripheral regulatory T-cell generation
Arpaia, N., Campbell, C., Fan, X., Dikiy, S., van der Veeken, J., deRoos, P., Liu, H., Cross, J. R., Pfeffer, K., Coffer, P. J., et al. (2013) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature12726 · Cited by 4,838
Adjustment for total energy intake in epidemiologic studies
Willett, W. C., Howe, G., & Kushi, L. H. (1997) · American Journal of Clinical Nutrition · doi:10.1093/ajcn/65.4.1220s · Cited by 3,805
Flexible regression models with cubic splines
Durrleman, S., & Simon, R. M. (1989) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780080504 · Cited by 2,722
Health benefits of dietary fiber
Anderson, J. W., Baird, P., Davis Jr, R. H., Ferreri, S., Knudtson, M., Koraym, A., Waters, V., & Williams, C. L. (2009) · Nutrition Reviews · doi:10.1111/j.1753-4887.2009.00189.x · Cited by 2,239
Chang, P. V., Hao, L., Offermanns, S., & Medzhitov, R. (2014) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1322269111 · Cited by 2,175
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Prosky, 1985, Determination of total dietary fiber in foods and food products., J Assoc Off Anal Chem, 68, 677
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Global burden of colorectal cancer: emerging trends, risk factors and prevention strategies
Keum, N., & Giovannucci, E. L. (2019) · Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1038/s41575-019-0189-8 · Cited by 2,791
Self-citationInfluence of the Gut Microbiome, Diet, and Environment on Risk of Colorectal Cancer
Song, M., Chan, A. T., & Sun, J. (2020) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2019.06.048 · Cited by 752
Self-citationColorectal Cancer and Nutrition
Thanikachalam, K., & Khan, G. N. (2019) · Nutrients · doi:10.3390/nu11010164 · Cited by 782
Chen, D., Jin, D., Huang, S., Wu, J., Xu, M., Liu, T., Dong, W., Liu, X., Wang, S., Zhong, W., et al. (2019) · Cancer Letters · doi:10.1016/j.canlet.2019.11.019 · Cited by 502
The Immunomodulatory Functions of Butyrate
Siddiqui, M. T., & Cresci, G. A. (2021) · Journal of Inflammation Research · doi:10.2147/jir.s300989 · Cited by 381
Metadata
- Authors
- Song, M., Wu, K., Meyerhardt, J. A., Ogino, S., Wang, M., Fuchs, C. S., Giovannucci, E. L., & Chan, A. T.
- Affiliations
- Harvard University (US)
- Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
- Yale Cancer Center (US)
- Broad Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Chan, Andrew T.
- ORCID
- Venue
- JAMA Oncology
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2018-01-01
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 71
- ISSN
- 2374-2437 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC5776713
- OpenAlex
- W2766404639
- Cited by
- 197
- References
- 71
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 19
- FWCI
- 15.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- JAMA Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (UL1TR001863)
- National Cancer Institute (R01CA176272, P50CA127003, R01CA202704, R01CA151993, R01CA118553, R01CA137178, R35CA197735, P01CA087969, R01CA169141, P01CA055075, UM1CA186107, UM1CA167552, U01CA176726, U01CA167552)
- National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (K24DK098311)
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Nutritional Studies and Diet
- Health Sciences › Nursing › Nutrition and Dietetics › Food composition and properties
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Screening and Detection
- Keywords
- dietary fiber intake, colorectal cancer, cancer survivors, mortality, colorectal cancer-specific mortality, all-cause mortality, cereal fiber, whole grains, Nurses' Health Study, Health Professionals Follow-up Study, healthcare workers
- MeSH terms
- Cancer Survivors, Adult, Aged, Diet Surveys, Dietary Fiber, Eating, Feeding Behavior, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Health Occupations, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Colorectal Neoplasms, Cohort Studies
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-07, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-07 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
