METHOD: Between 1995 and 2000, a standardized 24-h dietary recall was conducted among 36,018 men and women from 27 European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study centres. Adjusted arithmetic means of intakes were estimated in grams (=volume) per day by sex and centre. Means of intake across centres were compared by sociodemographic characteristics and lifestyle factors.
RESULTS: In women, the mean daily intake of coffee ranged from 94 g/day (~0.6 cups) in Greece to 781 g/day (~4.4 cups) in Aarhus (Denmark), and tea from 14 g/day (~0.1 cups) in Navarra (Spain) to 788 g/day (~4.3 cups) in the UK general population. Similar geographical patterns for mean daily intakes of both coffee and tea were observed in men. Current smokers as compared with those who reported never smoking tended to drink on average up to 500 g/day more coffee and tea combined, but with substantial variation across centres. Other individuals' characteristics such as educational attainment or age were less predictive. In all centres, coffee and tea contributed to less than 10% of the energy intake. The greatest contribution to total sugar intakes was observed in Southern European centres (up to ~20%).
CONCLUSION: Coffee and tea intake and their contribution to energy and sugar intake differed greatly among European adults. Variation in consumption was mostly driven by geographical region.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: This prospective analysis included 471,495 adults from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC, 1992-2014, median follow-up: 15.3 y), among whom there were 49,794 incident cancer cases (main locations: breast, n = 12,063; prostate, n = 6,745; colon-rectum, n = 5,806). Usual food intakes were assessed with standardized country-specific diet assessment methods. The FSAm-NPS was calculated for each food/beverage using their 100-g content in energy, sugar, saturated fatty acid, sodium, fibres, proteins, and fruits/vegetables/legumes/nuts. The FSAm-NPS scores of all food items usually consumed by a participant were averaged to obtain the individual FSAm-NPS Dietary Index (DI) scores. Multi-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were computed. A higher FSAm-NPS DI score, reflecting a lower nutritional quality of the food consumed, was associated with a higher risk of total cancer (HRQ5 versus Q1 = 1.07; 95% CI 1.03-1.10, P-trend < 0.001). Absolute cancer rates in those with high and low (quintiles 5 and 1) FSAm-NPS DI scores were 81.4 and 69.5 cases/10,000 person-years, respectively. Higher FSAm-NPS DI scores were specifically associated with higher risks of cancers of the colon-rectum, upper aerodigestive tract and stomach, lung for men, and liver and postmenopausal breast for women (all P < 0.05). The main study limitation is that it was based on an observational cohort using self-reported dietary data obtained through a single baseline food frequency questionnaire; thus, exposure misclassification and residual confounding cannot be ruled out.
CONCLUSIONS: In this large multinational European cohort, the consumption of food products with a higher FSAm-NPS score (lower nutritional quality) was associated with a higher risk of cancer. This supports the relevance of the FSAm-NPS as underlying nutrient profiling system for front-of-pack nutrition labels, as well as for other public health nutritional measures.