• [Wheat Bran / Rats Table] shows the potency of wheat bran on colonic tumor incidence in rats (excluded w. bran refs)
• [Wheat Bran / Min mice Table] shows the potency of wheat bran on the number of tumors in the intestine of Min mice

Figures from Rat Table <:3 )~~ and Mouse Table

. . . <:3 )~~ . .

Identical figures below as above, but "Text links" instead of "Icon links"

• Wheat Bran / Rats figure shows the potency of wheat bran on colonic tumor incidence in rats (funnel plot)
• Wheat Bran studies Funnel plot (shows no significant publication bias)
• Subset analysis of Wheat Bran studies in rats fed a High Fat diet
• Subset analysis of Wheat Bran studies in rats fed a Low Fat diet
• Meta-Analysis shareware EasyMA (DOS 2001 version) was used to analyse rat data and draw figures
• Wheat Bran / Min Mice figure shows the potency of wheat bran on the number of small intestinal in Apc mutated mice
• Meta-Analysis shareware EasyMA (online 2005 version) was used to analyse mice data and draw figures

Wheat bran effect in carcinogen-injected rats. A significant protection by wheat bran is shown in only two studies out of twelve publications [Table]. Meta-analysis, including 1164 rats, showed that wheat bran reduces colon tumour incidence in rats (RR= 0.83, p=0.0002) [Table], with similar RR in Random model analysis (0.87, p=0.015) [Figure]. The hypothesis that wheat bran specifically prevents fat promotion was tested by analysing separately studies with high fat and low fat diets. Wheat bran indeed protected rats given a high-fat diet (RR= 0.79, p=0.006) [HF figure], but not rats given a low-fat diet [LF figure].
Wheat bran effect in mutated mice. The eight studies gathering 147 Min mice showed a protective effect of wheat bran [Table]. Number of small intestinal polyps in wheat bran-fed mice was 69% of control number (weighted mean, 66%, p=0.001) [Table], and effect size was -0.74 by Random model analysis (p<0.001) [Figure]. Bran also marginally decreased colonic tumours (p=0.07, see Fig.1 in [preprint]).
Extracted from the article: "Corpet D.E. & Pierre F., 2005, European Journal of Cancer, How good are Rodent Models of Carcinogenesis in Predicting Efficacy in Humans? Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Colon Tumour Chemoprevention in Rats, Mice and Men. in the press." Fetch the [preprint] (.pdf)

• Column "p": NS, Non Significant; MS, Marginally Significant; *, significant: p<0.05 (by Fisher's test).
  Last line: Meta-analysis global p value, calculated by Chi-square test, without Yates correction for continuity.
• Columns 3 & 4: Number of tumor-bearing rats in control group (col.3); Total number of control rats (col.4). Control rats' data were duplicated in each line with treated rats data, although control rats were summed only once in last line. Duplicated numbers are tagged with a "-" (e.g., 15- )
• Meta-Analysis Methods: See bottom of previous page on Meta Analysis