Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Log out
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • Highly Cited Collection
      • Prevention and Early Detection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • OnlineFirst
    • Editors' Picks
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • AACR Publications
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Log out

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • Highly Cited Collection
      • Prevention and Early Detection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • OnlineFirst
    • Editors' Picks
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
Null Results in Brief

Well-Done Meat Consumption, NAT1 and NAT2 Acetylator Genotypes and Prostate Cancer Risk: The Multiethnic Cohort study

Sangita Sharma, Xia Cao, Lynne R. Wilkens, Jennifer Yamamoto, Annette Lum-Jones, Brian E. Henderson, Laurence N. Kolonel and Loïc Le Marchand
Sangita Sharma
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Xia Cao
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Lynne R. Wilkens
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jennifer Yamamoto
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Annette Lum-Jones
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brian E. Henderson
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Laurence N. Kolonel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Loïc Le Marchand
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0231 Published July 2010
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background: Prostate cancer (PC) is the most common male malignancy in the United States and disparities in risk exist among ethnic/racial groups. A high intake of well-done meat and the presence of the rapid NAT1 and slow NAT2 acetylator genotypes, as modifiers of the carcinogenic effect of heterocyclic amines, were hypothesized to increase PC risk and possibly explain these ethnic differences in risk.

Methods: This study examined the associations between well-done (red) meat consumption, NAT1 and NAT2 acetylator genotypes, and PC risk among five ethnicities (African American, Native Hawaiian, Japanese American, Latino, and Caucasian) in a case-control study of PC nested within the Multiethnic Cohort study. Cases (n = 2,106) and controls (n = 2,063) were genotyped for eight single nucleotide polymorphisms in NAT1 and seven single nucleotide polymorphisms in NAT2 that characterized all common alleles for these genes. Well-done meat intake was computed based on responses to a detailed food frequency questionnaire including a question on meat preference. Conditional logistic regression was used in the analysis.

Results: There was no evidence of an increased risk associated with preference for well-done meat, intake of well-done meat, and NAT1 or NAT2 genotypes (jointly or separately).

Conclusions: These results do not support the hypothesis that exposure to heterocyclic amines is associated with risk of PC. However, additional studies with more precise exposure measures are needed. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 19(7); 1866–70. ©2010 AACR.

Introduction

Prostate cancer (PC) is the most common male malignancy in the United States and risk varies by ethnicity, which could partially be due to differential exposure to heterocyclic aromatic amines (HAAs), a class of carcinogens formed when meat is cooked at high temperature (1-8). The rapid NAT1 and the slow NAT2 genotypes are suspected to increase PC risk due to their effect on HAA activation by O-acetylation in the prostate and decreased detoxification of HAAs in the liver, respectively (9-11). We examined associations between well-done meat and PC risk, and the modifying effects of NAT1 and NAT2 acetylator genotypes, among five ethnic/racial groups.

Materials and Methods

This case-control study nested in the Multiethnic Cohort was approved by the Institutional Review Boards at the University of Hawaii and the University of Southern California. Participants (N > 215,000) were recruited from Hawaii and Los Angeles from 1993 to 1996, were aged 45 to 75 years at entry, and were primarily comprised of African American, Native Hawaiian, Japanese American, Latino, and Caucasian men and women (12, 13). Incident PC cases since January 1995 were identified through Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registries (14). Blood samples were generally obtained after diagnosis (15). Controls were frequency-matched by ethnicity and age.

NAT1 and NAT2 were determined using TaqMan allele discrimination assays (Applied Biosystems; refs. 16, 17) with a successful genotyping rate of ≥98.7% and genotype concordance (among 5% blind quality control duplicates) of ≥98.5%. The genotype distributions among controls were in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (P > 0.05) for each ethnic group. Through genotyping of seven single nucleotide polymorphisms occurring with >1% frequency in at least one ethnicity [G191A (R64Q), C282T, T341C (I114T), C481T, G590A (R197Q), A803G (K268R), and G857A (G286T)], 26 of the common NAT2 allelic variants could be detected (NAT2*4; NAT2*5A,B,C,D,E,G,J; NAT2*6A,B,C,E; NAT2*7A,B; NAT2*11A; NAT2*12A,B,C; NAT2*13; and NAT2*14A,B,C,D,E,F,G; ref. 18). Similarly, all common NAT1 allelic variants (NAT1*3; NAT1*4; NAT1*10; NAT1*11A,B,C; NAT1*14A,B; NAT1*15; NAT1*17; NAT1*19; and NAT1*22) could be characterized by genotyping eight single nucleotide polymorphisms [C97T (R33Stop), C1095A (3′-UTR), C190T (R64W), G445A (V149I), C559T (R187Stop), G560A (R187Q), A752T (D251V), and T1088A (3′-UTR); refs. (16, 17)]. Individuals with two “rapid” alleles (NAT2*4, NAT2*11A, NAT2*12A,B,C, and NAT2*13), two “slow” phenotypes, and with one “rapid” and one “slow” allele were assigned to the “rapid”, “slow”, and “intermediate” NAT2 genotypes, respectively. The NAT1*10 allele was designated as the “at-risk” phenotype. NAT1 was categorized as “NAT1*10”, “NAT1*10/other NAT1 allele”, and “any combination of other NAT1 alleles”, represented as “two copies”, “one copy”, and “zero copies”, respectively. Missing single nucleotide polymorphism results were imputed when certainty was ≥95% using PHASE (version 2.1; refs. 18, 19).

The validated food frequency questionnaire included questions on preference for well-done meat and the amount and frequency of consumption of different types of meat over the past year (12, 13). The meat groups were computed as the sum of all corresponding food items and the relevant proportion from mixed dishes.

Conditional logistic regression stratified by 5-year age groups and ethnicity, and adjusted for energy, body mass index, education, family history, and smoking was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using SAS, version 9.1 (SAS). Adjustment for fat was not included because fat intake was not found to have any effect on PC risk in the Multiethnic Cohort. Interactions between ethnicity, well-done red meat, and NAT1 and NAT2 were examined by a Wald test of cross-product terms. Results for Native Hawaiians are not presented separately because of the small sample size, although they were included in the combined group.

Results

Among cases and controls, more African Americans and Latinos consumed well-done meat than other ethnicities (Table 1). African Americans had a higher prevalence than Caucasians for the high-risk NAT1*10 allele but not for the NAT2 slow genotype.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

ORs and 95% CIs for risk of prostate cancer associated with meat preference, NAT1, and NAT2 genotype

The age- and ethnicity-adjusted and multivariate-adjusted ORs were similar in all models. No statistically significant association was observed between meat preference (Pheterogeneity = 0.72; Table 1) or types of meat by level of doneness and PC risk. There was no association with PC risk for one or two copies of NAT1*10 compared with zero copies, the intermediate or slow NAT2 compared with the rapid genotype (Pheterogeneity = 0.37 for NAT1 and 0.25 for NAT2; Table 1) or NAT1 and NAT2 jointly (data not shown). The OR for men with two copies of NAT1*10 and the slow NAT2 genotype was 0.81 (0.54-1.21) compared with those with zero copies and the rapid genotype (Pheterogeneity = 0.22). The two-way (Table 2) and three-way interactions of NAT1*10, NAT2, and preference for well-done meat were not significant. All results were also null in an analysis of advanced PC.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

ORs and 95% CIs for risk of prostate cancer associated with the two-way interaction between NAT1/NAT2 and preference for well-done meat

Discussion

This study did not find significant associations for well-done meat, NAT1 and NAT2 with PC risk overall, by ethnicity or among advanced PC cases. Our null findings for meat and PC risk agree with a previous cohort study (20). In another study, high consumption of red meat doubled the PC risk for African Americans (21), whereas in two largely Caucasian cohorts, a direct association was observed for high intake of red meat and well-done meat with PC risk (4, 22). The slow NAT2 genotype has been associated with a lowered PC risk, whereas the rapid NAT2 genotype has been associated with a nonsignificantly elevated PC risk (23, 24). Among Japanese, the NAT1*10 allele was related to a higher PC risk (25) and the slow NAT2 genotype was more common in PC cases than controls (26). In agreement with our results, other studies also found no relationship between NAT2 and PC (27, 28). The combination of the NAT1*10 allele and the slow NAT2 genotype has been associated with a 5-fold higher PC risk and the very slow NAT2 genotype with a 7-fold elevated PC risk (11). In one small case-control study, the associations of meat and NAT1/NAT2 with PC were also not significant (29).

This study is the first large nested case-control study to investigate the ethnicity-specific effect of well-done meat, NAT1, and NAT2 on PC risk. A food frequency questionnaire developed specifically for this population was used to ensure standardized data collection, and a comprehensive number of NAT1 and NAT2 single nucleotide polymorphisms were genotyped. Because exposure to dietary HAAs is difficult to measure, as it depends on the type of meat, as well as the duration and temperature of cooking, additional studies with more direct measurement of HAAs would be useful.

In conclusion, these data do not support the hypothesis that consumption of well-done meat, NAT1, NAT2, or their interactions are associated with PC risk.

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Acknowledgments

We thank Lucy Shen who helped with the data analysis. Special thanks to Eva Erber and Dr. Mohammadreza Pakseresht for reviewing and editing the manuscript. The content of this paper is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views or policies of the funding institutions.

Grant Support: Department of Defense (grant no. W81XWH-04-1-0248), the National Cancer Institute (grants R37 CA54821 and R01CA63464, and contracts N01-PC-35137 and N01-PC-35139), and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA-NRI New Investigator Award, grant no. 2002-00793).

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Footnotes

    • Received March 3, 2010.
    • Accepted April 15, 2010.

    References

    1. ↵
      National Center for Health Statistics. Health, United States, 2008 with Chartbook. Hyattsville (MD); 2009.
    2. American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2009. Atlanta (GA); 2009.
      1. Horner M,
      2. Ries L,
      3. Krapacho M,
      4. et al
      . [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2006. (updated 2009; cited August 27, 2009). Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2006.
    3. ↵
      1. Michaud DS,
      2. Augustsson K,
      3. Rimm EB,
      4. Stampfer MJ,
      5. Willet WC,
      6. Giovannucci E
      . A prospective study on intake of animal products and risk of prostate cancer. Cancer Causes Control 2001;12:557–67.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Sinha R
      . An epidemiologic approach to studying heterocyclic amines. Mutat Res 2002;506-507:197–204.
      OpenUrlPubMed
      1. Keating GA,
      2. Bogen KT
      . Methods for estimating heterocyclic amine concentrations in cooked meats in the US diet. Food Chem Toxicol 2001;39:29–43.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
      1. Skog K
      . Problems associated with the determination of heterocyclic amines in cooked foods and human exposure. Food Chem Toxicol 2002;40:1197–203.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    4. ↵
      1. Jagerstad M,
      2. Skog K
      . Genotoxicity of heat-processed foods. Mutat Res 2005;574:156–72.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    5. ↵
      1. Delfino RJ,
      2. Sinha R,
      3. Smith C,
      4. et al
      . Breast cancer, heterocyclic aromatic amines from meat and N-acetyltransferase 2 genotype. Carcinogenesis 2000;21:607–15.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
      1. Hein DW
      . Molecular genetics and function of NAT1 and NAT2: role in aromatic amine metabolism and carcinogenesis. Mutat Res 2002;506-507:65–77.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    6. ↵
      1. Hein DW,
      2. Leff MA,
      3. Ishibe N,
      4. et al
      . Association of prostate cancer with rapid N-acetyltransferase 1 (NAT1*10) in combination with slow N-acetyltransferase 2 acetylator genotypes in a pilot case-control study. Environ Mol Mutagen 2002;40:161–7.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    7. ↵
      1. Kolonel LN,
      2. Henderson BE,
      3. Hankin JH,
      4. et al
      . A multiethnic cohort in Hawaii and Los Angeles: baseline characteristics. Am J Epidemiol 2000;151:346–57.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    8. ↵
      1. Stram DO,
      2. Hankin JH,
      3. Wilkens LR,
      4. et al
      . Calibration of the dietary questionnaire for a multiethnic cohort in Hawaii and Los Angeles. Am J Epidemiol 2000;151:358–70.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    9. ↵
      National Cancer Institute [Internet]. Bethesda (MD): overview of the SEER program. [cited 2010 Feb 14]. Available from: http://seer.cancer.gov/about/.
    10. ↵
      1. Cheng I,
      2. Stram DO,
      3. Penney KL,
      4. et al
      . Common genetic variation in IGF1 and prostate cancer risk in the Multiethnic Cohort. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:123–34.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    11. ↵
      1. Doll MA,
      2. Hein DW
      . Comprehensive human NAT2 genotype method using single nucleotide polymorphism-specific polymerase chain reaction primers and fluorogenic probes. Anal Biochem 2001;288:106–8.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    12. ↵
      1. Doll MA,
      2. Hein DW
      . Rapid genotype method to distinguish frequent and/or functional polymorphisms in human N-acetyltransferase-1. Anal Biochem 2002;301:328–32.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    13. ↵
      1. Stephens M,
      2. Smith NJ,
      3. Donnelly P
      . A new statistical method for haplotype reconstruction from population data. Am J Hum Genet 2001;68:978–89.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    14. ↵
      1. Stephens M,
      2. Donnelly P
      . A comparison of Bayesian methods for haplotype reconstruction from population genotype data. Am J Hum Genet 2003;73:1162–9.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    15. ↵
      1. Rohrmann S,
      2. Platz EA,
      3. Kavanaugh CJ,
      4. Thuita L,
      5. Hoffman SC,
      6. Helzlsouer KJ
      . Meat and dairy consumption and subsequent risk of prostate cancer in a US cohort study. Cancer Causes Control 2007;18:41–50.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    16. ↵
      1. Rodriguez C,
      2. McCullough ML,
      3. Mondul AM,
      4. et al
      . Meat consumption among Black and White men and risk of prostate cancer in the Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:211–6.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    17. ↵
      1. Cross AJ,
      2. Peters U,
      3. Kirsh VA,
      4. et al
      . A prospective study of meat and meat mutagens and prostate cancer risk. Cancer Res 2005;65:11779–84.
      OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    18. ↵
      1. Costa S,
      2. Pinto D,
      3. Morais A,
      4. et al
      . Acetylation genotype and the genetic susceptibility to prostate cancer in a southern European population. Prostate 2005;64:246–52.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    19. ↵
      1. Srivastava DS,
      2. Mittal RD
      . Genetic polymorphism of the N-acetyltransferase 2 gene, and susceptibility to prostate cancer: a pilot study in north Indian population. BMC Urol 2005;5:12.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    20. ↵
      1. Hamasaki T,
      2. Inatomi H,
      3. Katoh T,
      4. et al
      . N-acetyltransferase-2 gene polymorphism as a possible biomarker for prostate cancer in Japanese men. Int J Urol 2003;10:167–73.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    21. ↵
      1. Yang M,
      2. Katoh T,
      3. Delongchamp R,
      4. Ozawa S,
      5. Kohshi K,
      6. Kawamoto T
      . Relationship between NAT1 genotype and phenotype in a Japanese population. Pharmacogenetics 2000;10:225–32.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    22. ↵
      1. Agundez JA,
      2. Martinez C,
      3. Olivera M,
      4. et al
      . Expression in human prostate of drug- and carcinogen-metabolizing enzymes: association with prostate cancer risk. Br J Cancer 1998;78:1361–7.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    23. ↵
      1. Wadelius M,
      2. Autrup JL,
      3. Stubbins MJ,
      4. et al
      . Polymorphisms in NAT2, CYP2D6, CYP2C19 and GSTP1 and their association with prostate cancer. Pharmacogenetics 1999;9:333–40.
      OpenUrlPubMed
    24. ↵
      1. Rovito PM Jr.,
      2. Morse PD,
      3. Spinek K,
      4. et al
      . Heterocyclic amines and genotype of N-acetyltransferases as risk factors for prostate cancer. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2005;8:69–74.
      OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    View Abstract
    PreviousNext
    Back to top
    Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention: 19 (7)
    July 2010
    Volume 19, Issue 7
    • Table of Contents
    • Table of Contents (PDF)
    • Index by Author

    Sign up for alerts

    View this article with LENS

    Open full page PDF
    Article Alerts
    Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
    Email Article

    Thank you for sharing this Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention article.

    NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Well-Done Meat Consumption, NAT1 and NAT2 Acetylator Genotypes and Prostate Cancer Risk: The Multiethnic Cohort study
    (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    (Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.
    Citation Tools
    Well-Done Meat Consumption, NAT1 and NAT2 Acetylator Genotypes and Prostate Cancer Risk: The Multiethnic Cohort study
    Sangita Sharma, Xia Cao, Lynne R. Wilkens, Jennifer Yamamoto, Annette Lum-Jones, Brian E. Henderson, Laurence N. Kolonel and Loïc Le Marchand
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev July 1 2010 (19) (7) 1866-1870; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0231

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    Share
    Well-Done Meat Consumption, NAT1 and NAT2 Acetylator Genotypes and Prostate Cancer Risk: The Multiethnic Cohort study
    Sangita Sharma, Xia Cao, Lynne R. Wilkens, Jennifer Yamamoto, Annette Lum-Jones, Brian E. Henderson, Laurence N. Kolonel and Loïc Le Marchand
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev July 1 2010 (19) (7) 1866-1870; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0231
    del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    Jump to section

    • Article
      • Abstract
      • Introduction
      • Materials and Methods
      • Results
      • Discussion
      • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
      • Acknowledgments
      • Footnotes
      • References
    • Figures & Data
    • Info & Metrics
    • PDF
    Advertisement

    Related Articles

    Cited By...

    More in this TOC Section

    • Dietary Acrylamide and Renal Cell Cancer Risk
    • Genetic Risk for Thyroid SMN in Childhood Cancer Survivors
    • Genes near breast cancer GWAS loci not associated with risk
    Show more Null Results in Brief
    • Home
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Privacy Policy
    Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   YouTube   RSS

    Articles

    • Online First
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues

    Info for

    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Librarians
    • Reviewers

    About Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

    • About the Journal
    • Editorial Board
    • Permissions
    • Submit a Manuscript
    AACR logo

    Copyright © 2019 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

    Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    eISSN: 1538-7755
    ISSN: 1055-9965

    Advertisement