Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Clinical Oncology/Epidemiology
  • Published:

Clinical Oncology/Epidemiology

Starch intake and colorectal cancer risk: an international comparison

Abstract

Intakes of starch, non-starch polysaccharides (NSPs), protein and fat have been compared with colorectal cancer incidence in 12 populations worldwide. There were strong inverse associations between starch consumption and large bowel cancer incidence (large bowel r = -0.70, colon r = -0.76). There was no significant relation with NSPs, although the association with large bowel cancer incidence was still significant when NSP was combined with resistant starch (RS) to give an estimate of fermentable carbohydrate (large bowel r = -0.52, colon r = -0.60). The relationships between starch, RS and NSPs and cancer incidence remained statistically significant after adjusting for fat and protein intakes. The strong inverse associations found here suggest a potentially important role for starch in protection against colorectal cancer and correspond with the hypothesis that fermentation in the colon is the mechanism for preventing colorectal cancer. Measures of both starch and NSPs need to be included in future epidemiological studies of diet and bowel cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cassidy, A., Bingham, S. & Cummings, J. Starch intake and colorectal cancer risk: an international comparison. Br J Cancer 69, 937–942 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1994.181

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1994.181

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links