# WCRF/AICR CUP 2010 (SLR 2010 Figs 70/74/78) and Chan et al. 2011 (PLoS ONE Fig 4): red meat per 100 g/day

All pooled estimates: DerSimonian–Laird random effects; weights are random-effects weights (%). Leave-one-out after each run.

## CRC – published per-study values (SLR 2010 Fig 70 = Chan 2011 Fig 4)

Published: 1.17 (1.05–1.31). **Pooled: 1.17 (1.05–1.31)** (fixed 1.17 (1.05–1.31); I² 0 %; k = 8). **Reproduced.**

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| pietinen1999 | 0.83 (0.43–1.61) | 2.9 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 99 vs 35 g/day (Fig 73)) (w 2.92 %) |
| jarvinen2001 | 1.37 (0.92–2.06) | 7.8 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: Q4 vs Q1 (Fig 73)) (w 7.74 %) |
| tiemersma2002 | 1.69 (0.88–3.23) | 3.0 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: times/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 2.98 %) |
| english2004 | 1.19 (0.89–1.58) | 15.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: times/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 15.79 %) |
| larsson2005 | 1.23 (0.90–1.67) | 13.3 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: servings/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 13.11 %) |
| norat2005 | 1.21 (1.02–1.43) | 44.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day observed (non-calibrated) (w 44.43 %) |
| lee2009 | 0.80 (0.52–1.23) | 6.8 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: >=67 vs <24 g/day (Table 34)) (w 6.78 %) |
| nothlings2009 | 1.00 (0.64–1.57) | 6.3 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 26 vs 0-10.3 g/1000kcal/day (Table 34)) (w 6.25 %) |

Leave-one-out: without pietinen1999: 1.18 (1.06–1.33); without jarvinen2001: 1.16 (1.03–1.30); without tiemersma2002: 1.16 (1.03–1.30); without english2004: 1.16 (1.01–1.33); without larsson2005: 1.16 (1.01–1.32); without norat2005: 1.14 (0.97–1.33); without lee2009: 1.21 (1.07–1.35); without nothlings2009: 1.18 (1.05–1.33)

## CRC – corrected: model

**Pooled: 1.15 (0.99–1.34)** (fixed 1.15 (1.00–1.33); I² 5 %; k = 8). 

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| pietinen1999 | 0.83 (0.43–1.61) | 5.0 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 99 vs 35 g/day (Fig 73)) (w 2.92 %) |
| jarvinen2001 | 1.37 (0.92–2.06) | 13.0 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: Q4 vs Q1 (Fig 73)) (w 7.74 %) |
| tiemersma2002 | 1.69 (0.88–3.23) | 5.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: times/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 2.98 %) |
| english2004 | 1.12 (0.89–1.57) | 24.8 | model: adjusted for processed meat |
| larsson2005 | 1.23 (0.90–1.67) | 21.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: servings/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 13.11 %) |
| norat2005 | 1.49 (0.91–2.43) | 8.9 | model: calibrated |
| lee2009 | 0.80 (0.52–1.23) | 11.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: >=67 vs <24 g/day (Table 34)) (w 6.78 %) |
| nothlings2009 | 1.00 (0.64–1.57) | 10.6 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 26 vs 0-10.3 g/1000kcal/day (Table 34)) (w 6.25 %) |

Leave-one-out: without pietinen1999: 1.17 (1.00–1.37); without jarvinen2001: 1.12 (0.95–1.32); without tiemersma2002: 1.13 (0.97–1.31); without english2004: 1.16 (0.96–1.40); without larsson2005: 1.13 (0.94–1.36); without norat2005: 1.12 (0.96–1.31); without lee2009: 1.21 (1.03–1.40); without nothlings2009: 1.17 (0.99–1.39)

## CRC – corrected: exposure

**Pooled: 1.16 (1.03–1.30)** (fixed 1.16 (1.03–1.30); I² 0 %; k = 7). 

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| pietinen1999 | 0.83 (0.43–1.61) | 3.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 99 vs 35 g/day (Fig 73)) (w 2.92 %) |
| tiemersma2002 | 1.69 (0.88–3.23) | 3.3 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: times/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 2.98 %) |
| english2004 | 1.19 (0.89–1.58) | 16.7 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: times/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 15.79 %) |
| larsson2005 | 1.23 (0.90–1.67) | 14.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: servings/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 13.11 %) |
| norat2005 | 1.21 (1.02–1.43) | 48.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day observed (non-calibrated) (w 44.43 %) |
| lee2009 | 0.80 (0.52–1.23) | 7.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: >=67 vs <24 g/day (Table 34)) (w 6.78 %) |
| nothlings2009 | 1.00 (0.64–1.57) | 6.8 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 26 vs 0-10.3 g/1000kcal/day (Table 34)) (w 6.25 %) |

Leave-one-out: without pietinen1999: 1.17 (1.04–1.32); without tiemersma2002: 1.14 (1.01–1.29); without english2004: 1.13 (0.97–1.32); without larsson2005: 1.13 (0.97–1.31); without norat2005: 1.10 (0.93–1.31); without lee2009: 1.19 (1.05–1.35); without nothlings2009: 1.16 (1.01–1.33)

## CRC – corrected: all classes

**Pooled: 1.12 (0.95–1.32)** (fixed 1.12 (0.96–1.31); I² 9 %; k = 7). 

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| pietinen1999 | 0.83 (0.43–1.61) | 6.0 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 99 vs 35 g/day (Fig 73)) (w 2.92 %) |
| tiemersma2002 | 1.69 (0.88–3.23) | 6.1 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: times/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 2.98 %) |
| english2004 | 1.12 (0.89–1.57) | 27.8 | model: adjusted for processed meat |
| larsson2005 | 1.23 (0.90–1.67) | 24.0 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: servings/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 13.11 %) |
| norat2005 | 1.49 (0.91–2.43) | 10.5 | model: calibrated |
| lee2009 | 0.80 (0.52–1.23) | 13.3 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: >=67 vs <24 g/day (Table 34)) (w 6.78 %) |
| nothlings2009 | 1.00 (0.64–1.57) | 12.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 26 vs 0-10.3 g/1000kcal/day (Table 34)) (w 6.25 %) |

Leave-one-out: without pietinen1999: 1.14 (0.96–1.36); without tiemersma2002: 1.10 (0.93–1.28); without english2004: 1.12 (0.90–1.39); without larsson2005: 1.09 (0.89–1.34); without norat2005: 1.09 (0.92–1.28); without lee2009: 1.18 (1.00–1.39); without nothlings2009: 1.14 (0.94–1.38)

## CRC – corrected: errors only (model choices as published)

**Pooled: 1.16 (1.03–1.30)** (fixed 1.16 (1.03–1.30); I² 0 %; k = 7). 

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| pietinen1999 | 0.83 (0.43–1.61) | 3.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 99 vs 35 g/day (Fig 73)) (w 2.92 %) |
| tiemersma2002 | 1.69 (0.88–3.23) | 3.3 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: times/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 2.98 %) |
| english2004 | 1.19 (0.89–1.58) | 16.7 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: times/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 15.79 %) |
| larsson2005 | 1.23 (0.90–1.67) | 14.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: servings/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 13.11 %) |
| norat2005 | 1.21 (1.02–1.43) | 48.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day observed (non-calibrated) (w 44.43 %) |
| lee2009 | 0.80 (0.52–1.23) | 7.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: >=67 vs <24 g/day (Table 34)) (w 6.78 %) |
| nothlings2009 | 1.00 (0.64–1.57) | 6.8 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 26 vs 0-10.3 g/1000kcal/day (Table 34)) (w 6.25 %) |

Leave-one-out: without pietinen1999: 1.17 (1.04–1.32); without tiemersma2002: 1.14 (1.01–1.29); without english2004: 1.13 (0.97–1.32); without larsson2005: 1.13 (0.97–1.31); without norat2005: 1.10 (0.93–1.31); without lee2009: 1.19 (1.05–1.35); without nothlings2009: 1.16 (1.01–1.33)

## CRC – corrected + follow-ups

**Pooled: 1.04 (0.96–1.13)** (fixed 1.04 (0.97–1.12); I² 6 %; k = 7). 

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| pietinen1999 | 0.83 (0.43–1.61) | 1.5 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: 99 vs 35 g/day (Fig 73)) (w 2.92 %) |
| tiemersma2002 | 1.69 (0.88–3.23) | 1.6 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: times/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 2.98 %) |
| english2004 | 1.12 (0.89–1.57) | 8.1 | model: adjusted for processed meat |
| larsson2005 | 1.23 (0.90–1.67) | 6.9 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: servings/week converted to g/day (T37) (w 13.11 %) |
| norat2005 | 1.06 (0.95–1.14) | 53.2 | follow-up: EPIC → Papadimitriou 2022 |
| lee2009 | 0.80 (0.52–1.23) | 3.6 | SLR 2010 Fig 70: per 100 g/day (categories: >=67 vs <24 g/day (Table 34)) (w 6.78 %) |
| nothlings2009 | 0.97 (0.83–1.13) | 25.1 | follow-up: MEC → Ollberding 2012 full cohort, unprocessed row (GL) |

Leave-one-out: without pietinen1999: 1.05 (0.95–1.15); without tiemersma2002: 1.04 (0.96–1.12); without english2004: 1.03 (0.93–1.15); without larsson2005: 1.03 (0.95–1.12); without norat2005: 1.04 (0.90–1.20); without lee2009: 1.05 (0.98–1.13); without nothlings2009: 1.07 (0.97–1.17)

## Colon – SLR 2010 Fig 74 (9 rows)

Published: 1.12 (0.97–1.29). **Pooled: 1.12 (0.97–1.29)** (fixed 1.12 (0.97–1.29); I² 0 %; k = 9). **Reproduced.**

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| bostick1994 | 0.94 (0.43–2.04) | 3.3 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170; T37 p165: per 100 g/day (categories: >3 vs <1 servings/week (beef, pork or lamb)) (w 3.29 %) |
| singh1998 | 2.49 (0.46–13.39) | 0.7 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170; T37 p164: per 100 g/day (categories: >=1 time/week vs never) (w 0.70 %) |
| jarvinen2001 | 1.30 (0.77–2.17) | 7.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: per 100 g/day (categories: Q4 vs Q1) (w 7.47 %) |
| english2004 | 1.00 (0.69–1.46) | 14.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: times/week converted (w 13.95 %) |
| wei2004_(T37) | 1.07 (0.74–1.52) | 9.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170; T37 p161: per 100 g/day (categories: >=5 servings/week vs 0-3/month) (w 15.55 %) |
| wei2004_(T37) | 1.19 (0.75–1.88) | 9.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170; T37 p162: per 100 g/day (categories: >=5 servings/week vs 0-3/month) (w 9.45 %) |
| norat2005 | 1.20 (0.96–1.48) | 42.5 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: per 100 g/day observed (w 42.51 %) |
| oba2006 | 0.74 (0.28–1.96) | 2.1 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: per 100 g/day (categories: M 56.6 vs 18.7; W 42.3 vs 10.7 g/day) (w 2.13 %) |
| lee2009 | 0.85 (0.45–1.61) | 4.9 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: per 100 g/day (categories: >=67 vs <24 g/day) (w 4.94 %) |

## Colon – Chan 2011 Fig 4 (SLR's 9 + Larsson 2005 colon)

Published: 1.17 (1.02–1.33). **Pooled: 1.17 (1.02–1.34)** (fixed 1.17 (1.02–1.34); I² 0 %; k = 10). **Reproduced.**

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| bostick1994 | 0.94 (0.43–2.04) | 2.9 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170; T37 p165: per 100 g/day (categories: >3 vs <1 servings/week (beef, pork or lamb)) (w 3.29 %) |
| singh1998 | 2.49 (0.46–13.39) | 0.6 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170; T37 p164: per 100 g/day (categories: >=1 time/week vs never) (w 0.70 %) |
| jarvinen2001 | 1.30 (0.77–2.17) | 6.7 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: per 100 g/day (categories: Q4 vs Q1) (w 7.47 %) |
| english2004 | 1.00 (0.69–1.46) | 12.7 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: times/week converted (w 13.95 %) |
| wei2004_(T37) | 1.07 (0.74–1.52) | 8.5 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170; T37 p161: per 100 g/day (categories: >=5 servings/week vs 0-3/month) (w 15.55 %) |
| wei2004_(T37) | 1.19 (0.75–1.88) | 8.5 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170; T37 p162: per 100 g/day (categories: >=5 servings/week vs 0-3/month) (w 9.45 %) |
| norat2005 | 1.20 (0.96–1.48) | 38.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: per 100 g/day observed (w 42.51 %) |
| oba2006 | 0.74 (0.28–1.96) | 1.9 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: per 100 g/day (categories: M 56.6 vs 18.7; W 42.3 vs 10.7 g/day) (w 2.13 %) |
| lee2009 | 0.85 (0.45–1.61) | 4.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 74 p170: per 100 g/day (categories: >=67 vs <24 g/day) (w 4.94 %) |
| larsson2005 | 1.68 (1.11–2.55) | 10.3 | Chan 2011 Fig 4: Larsson 2005 colon 1.68 (1.11–2.55), w 10.33 %; not in SLR Fig 74 and contradicts Chan S2 |

## Rectum – SLR 2010 Fig 78 (7 rows)

Published: 1.18 (0.98–1.42). **Pooled: 1.18 (0.98–1.43)** (fixed 1.18 (0.98–1.43); I² 0 %; k = 7). **Reproduced.**

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| jarvinen2001 | 1.32 (0.69–2.53) | 8.3 | SLR 2010 Fig 78: per 100 g/day (categories: Q4 vs Q1) (w 8.24 %) |
| english2004 | 1.57 (0.99–2.49) | 16.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 78: times/week converted (w 16.35 %) |
| wei2004_dered) | 0.95 (0.47–1.89) | 4.8 | SLR 2010 Fig 78: per 100 g/day (categories: >=5 servings/week vs 0-3/month) (w 7.30 %) |
| wei2004_dered) | 0.91 (0.39–2.15) | 4.8 | SLR 2010 Fig 78: per 100 g/day (categories: >=5 servings/week vs 0-3/month) (w 4.72 %) |
| norat2005 | 1.23 (0.94–1.62) | 47.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 78: per 100 g/day observed (w 47.17 %) |
| lee2009 | 0.74 (0.33–1.66) | 5.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 78: per 100 g/day (categories: >=67 vs <24 g/day) (w 5.34 %) |
| larsson2005 | 0.98 (0.55–1.72) | 10.8 | SLR 2010 Fig 78: servings/week converted (w 10.87 %) |

## CRC – highest vs lowest (SLR 2010 Fig 73, 12 rows)

Published: 1.10 (1.00–1.21). **Pooled: 1.10 (1.00–1.21)** (fixed 1.10 (1.02–1.19); I² 22 %; k = 12). **Reproduced.**

| Study | RR (95 % CI) | Weight % | Source / choice |
|---|---|---|---|
| cross2010 | 1.13 (0.98–1.30) | 21.1 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: Q5 vs Q1 (w  %) |
| lee2009 | 0.80 (0.60–1.10) | 7.8 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: >=67 vs <24 g/day (w  %) |
| nothlings2009 | 0.96 (0.74–1.23) | 10.3 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: 26 vs 0-10.3 g/1000kcal/day (w  %) |
| butler2008 | 1.01 (0.82–1.26) | 13.1 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: Q4 vs Q1 (w  %) |
| chan2005 | 1.21 (0.85–1.72) | 6.1 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: >0.5 vs <=0.5 servings/day (w  %) |
| larsson2005 | 1.22 (0.98–1.53) | 12.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: >=4 vs <2 servings/wk (w  %) |
| norat2005 | 1.17 (0.92–1.49) | 11.1 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: >80 vs <=10 g/day (w  %) |
| english2004 | 1.40 (1.00–1.90) | 7.1 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: >=6.5 vs <=3 times/wk (w  %) |
| tiemersma2002 | 1.60 (0.90–2.90) | 2.5 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: >=5 vs 0-3 times/wk (w  %) |
| jarvinen2001 | 1.50 (0.77–2.94) | 1.9 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: Q4 vs Q1 (w  %) |
| pietinen1999 | 0.80 (0.50–1.20) | 4.2 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: 99 vs 35 g (w  %) |
| kato1997 | 1.23 (0.68–2.22) | 2.4 | SLR 2010 Fig 73: Q4 vs Q1 (w  %) |

## Deviations (synthesis vs primary paper)

| Outcome | Study | Class | Deviation | Page | Alternative used |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| colorectal | nothlings2009 | exposure | Nöthlings 2009 analyses 'red meat' and 'processed red meat' without defining red meat; the later full-cohort MEC paper (Ollberding 2012) separates 'total red meat' from 'red meat excluding processed', so the 2009 variable probably includes processed meat (inference, not printed) | SLR 2010 T37; Nöthlings 2009 Methods | none available (documented only) |
| colorectal | nothlings2009 | inclusion | Nöthlings 2009 is a nested case-control study of 1,009 cases; the full MEC cohort analysis (Ollberding 2012, 3,404 cases) appeared later | Nöthlings 2009; Ollberding 2012 | none available (documented only) |
| colorectal | norat2005 | model | observed estimate; calibrated 1.49 (0.91–2.43) printed | Norat 2005 Table 4 | 1.49 (0.91–2.43) – calibrated |
| colorectal | english2004 | model | model not adjusted for processed meat | English 2004 | 1.12 (0.89–1.57) – adjusted for processed meat |
| colorectal | jarvinen2001 | exposure | near-total meat | Järvinen 2001 Table 3 | removed |
| colorectal | lee2009 | transcription | 0.80 (0.52–1.23) here; 0.81 (0.50–1.29) in SLR 2016 from the same table | SLR 2010 Fig 70; SLR 2016 Fig 125 | none available (documented only) |

## Notes

- Chan 2011's colon set includes Larsson 2005 colon (Fig 4, weight 10.33 %); its Table S2 states only Larsson's colorectal and rectal results were used. The SLR 2010 Fig 74 set (9 rows) does not include it. Both are reproduced.