The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Heme and Chlorophyll Intake and Risk of Colorectal Cancer in the Netherlands Cohort Study
Open accessAbstract
Background: The evidence for red meat as a determinant of colorectal cancer remains equivocal, which might be explained by differences in heme content. Heme is the pro-oxidant, iron-containing porphyrin pigment of meat and its content depends on the type of meat. Chlorophyll from green vegetables might modify this association. Methods: The Netherlands Cohort Study was initiated in 1986 when a self-administered questionnaire on risk factors for cancer was completed by 120,852 subjects ages 55 to 69 years. After 9.3 years of follow-up through the Cancer Registry, 1,535 incident colorectal cancer cases (869 men and 666 women) were available. Nineteen of the 150 items in the validated dietary questionnaire related to consumption of specific types of fresh and processed meat. Heme iron content was calculated as a type-specific percentage of the total iron content and chlorophyll content of vegetables was derived from the literature. Results: Multivariate rate ratios for quintiles of heme iron intake and colon cancer were 1.00, 0.98, 1.04, 1.13, and 1.29 (Ptrend = 0.10) among men and 1.00, 1.31, 1.44, 1.18, and 1.20 (Ptrend = 0.56) among women, respectively. No consistent associations were observed for rectal cancer. Rate ratios for colon cancer increased across successive quintiles of the ratio of heme/chlorophyll among men only (1.00, 1.08, 1.01, 1.32, and 1.43; Ptrend = 0.01). No associations were observed between fresh meat and colorectal cancer. Conclusion: Our data suggest an elevated risk of colon cancer in men with increasing intake of heme iron and decreasing intake of chlorophyll. Further research is needed to confirm these results. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(4):717–25)
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Vegetables, Fruit, and Cancer Prevention
STEINMETZ, K. A., & POTTER, J. D. (1996) · Journal of the American Dietetic Association · doi:10.1016/s0002-8223(96)00273-8 · Cited by 2,118
Cited by
Red and Processed Meat and Colorectal Cancer Incidence: Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies
Chan, D. S. M., Lau, R., Aune, D., Vieira, R., Greenwood, D. C., Kampman, E., & Norat, T. (2011) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0020456 · Cited by 903
Nutrients, foods, and colorectal cancer prevention
Song, M., Garrett, W. S., & Chan, A. T. (2015) · Gastroenterology · doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2014.12.035 · Cited by 700
Natural food pigments and colorants
Rodriguez-Amaya, D. B. (2016) · Current Opinion in Food Science · doi:10.1016/j.cofs.2015.08.004 · Cited by 489
Cross, A. J., Ferrucci, L. M., Risch, A., Graubard, B. I., Ward, M. H., Park, Y., Hollenbeck, A. R., Schatzkin, A., & Sinha, R. (2010) · Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.can-09-3929 · Cited by 469
Farvid, M. S., Sidahmed, E., Spence, N. D., Mante Angua, K., Rosner, B. A., & Barnett, J. B. (2021) · European Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1007/s10654-021-00741-9 · Cited by 447
Metadata
- Authors
- Balder, H. F., Vogel, J., Jansen, M. C. J. F., Weijenberg, M. P., van den Brandt, P. A., Westenbrink, S., van der Meer, R., & Goldbohm, R. A.
- Venue
- Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
- Published
- 2006-04-01
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 717-725
- ISSN
- 1055-9965 (ISSN-L)
- 1538-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2147875345
- Cited by
- 204
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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.
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Heme and Chlorophyll Intake and Risk of Colorectal Cancer in the Netherlands Cohort Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-05-0772
- The paper
- Balder, H. F., Vogel, J., Jansen, M. C. J. F., Weijenberg, M. P., van den Brandt, P. A., Westenbrink, S., van der Meer, R., & Goldbohm, R. A. (2006). Heme and Chlorophyll Intake and Risk of Colorectal Cancer in the Netherlands Cohort Study. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.epi-05-0772
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.