11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Vitamin D Intake and the Risk of Colorectal Cancer: An Updated Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review of Case-Control and Prospective Cohort Studies

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Simple Summary

          Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most diagnosed cancer in men and the second in women worldwide, being the second most deadly cancer worldwide. The evidence coming from experimental studies suggest a protective effect of vitamin D intake on the risk of CRC. Different studies have shown that vitamin D may play a chemopreventive role in colorectal adenoma incidence, malignant transformation and progression. Our objective was to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of both case-control and prospective cohort studies on vitamin D intake and CRC. This manuscript provides a complete and updated state-of-the-art about vitamin D intake and CRC risk.

          Abstract

          Obesity, a sedentary lifestyle, high red meat consumption and alcohol, and tobacco are considered the driving factors behind colorectal cancer (CRC) worldwide. Both diet and lifestyle are recognized to play an important role in the prevention of CRC. Forty years later, the vitamin D–cancer hypothesis is considered consistent. However, the relationship between low vitamin D intake and CRC is still controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis is to determine the associations between Vitamin D intake and CRC. MEDLINE-PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched up to May 2020 for studies evaluating the association between vitamin D intake (from foods and supplements) and CRC. Two reviewers, working independently, screened all titles and abstracts to identify the studies that met the inclusion criteria (case-control or prospective cohort (PC) studies published in English). Data were pooled by the generic inverse variance method using a random or fixed effect model. Heterogeneity was identified using the Cochran Q-test and quantified by the I 2 statistic. A total of 31 original studies were included for the quantitative meta-analysis, comprising a total 47.540 cases and 70.567 controls in case-control studies, and a total of 14.676 CRC-incident cases (out of 808.130 subjects in PC studies) from 17 countries. A significant 25% lower risk was reported comparing the highest vs. the lowest dietary vitamin D consumption and CRC risk (odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.75 (0.67; 0.85)) in case-control studies, whereas a non-significant association was reported in case of prospective studies (hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.94 (0.79; 1.11). The present meta-analysis demonstrates that high dietary vitamin D is associated to CRC prevention. However, larger and high-quality prospective studies and clinical trials are warranted to confirm this association.

          Related collections

          Most cited references68

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Global Cancer Statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN Estimates of Incidence and Mortality Worldwide for 36 Cancers in 185 Countries

          This article provides a status report on the global burden of cancer worldwide using the GLOBOCAN 2018 estimates of cancer incidence and mortality produced by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, with a focus on geographic variability across 20 world regions. There will be an estimated 18.1 million new cancer cases (17.0 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) and 9.6 million cancer deaths (9.5 million excluding nonmelanoma skin cancer) in 2018. In both sexes combined, lung cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer (11.6% of the total cases) and the leading cause of cancer death (18.4% of the total cancer deaths), closely followed by female breast cancer (11.6%), prostate cancer (7.1%), and colorectal cancer (6.1%) for incidence and colorectal cancer (9.2%), stomach cancer (8.2%), and liver cancer (8.2%) for mortality. Lung cancer is the most frequent cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among males, followed by prostate and colorectal cancer (for incidence) and liver and stomach cancer (for mortality). Among females, breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death, followed by colorectal and lung cancer (for incidence), and vice versa (for mortality); cervical cancer ranks fourth for both incidence and mortality. The most frequently diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death, however, substantially vary across countries and within each country depending on the degree of economic development and associated social and life style factors. It is noteworthy that high-quality cancer registry data, the basis for planning and implementing evidence-based cancer control programs, are not available in most low- and middle-income countries. The Global Initiative for Cancer Registry Development is an international partnership that supports better estimation, as well as the collection and use of local data, to prioritize and evaluate national cancer control efforts. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2018;0:1-31. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group.

            Because of the pressure for timely, informed decisions in public health and clinical practice and the explosion of information in the scientific literature, research results must be synthesized. Meta-analyses are increasingly used to address this problem, and they often evaluate observational studies. A workshop was held in Atlanta, Ga, in April 1997, to examine the reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies and to make recommendations to aid authors, reviewers, editors, and readers. Twenty-seven participants were selected by a steering committee, based on expertise in clinical practice, trials, statistics, epidemiology, social sciences, and biomedical editing. Deliberations of the workshop were open to other interested scientists. Funding for this activity was provided by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. We conducted a systematic review of the published literature on the conduct and reporting of meta-analyses in observational studies using MEDLINE, Educational Research Information Center (ERIC), PsycLIT, and the Current Index to Statistics. We also examined reference lists of the 32 studies retrieved and contacted experts in the field. Participants were assigned to small-group discussions on the subjects of bias, searching and abstracting, heterogeneity, study categorization, and statistical methods. From the material presented at the workshop, the authors developed a checklist summarizing recommendations for reporting meta-analyses of observational studies. The checklist and supporting evidence were circulated to all conference attendees and additional experts. All suggestions for revisions were addressed. The proposed checklist contains specifications for reporting of meta-analyses of observational studies in epidemiology, including background, search strategy, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion. Use of the checklist should improve the usefulness of meta-analyses for authors, reviewers, editors, readers, and decision makers. An evaluation plan is suggested and research areas are explored.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Colorectal cancer

              Several decades ago, colorectal cancer was infrequently diagnosed. Nowadays, it is the world's fourth most deadly cancer with almost 900 000 deaths annually. Besides an ageing population and dietary habits of high-income countries, unfavourable risk factors such as obesity, lack of physical exercise, and smoking increase the risk of colorectal cancer. Advancements in pathophysiological understanding have increased the array of treatment options for local and advanced disease leading to individual treatment plans. Treatments include endoscopic and surgical local excision, downstaging preoperative radiotherapy and systemic therapy, extensive surgery for locoregional and metastatic disease, local ablative therapies for metastases, and palliative chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy. Although these new treatment options have doubled overall survival for advanced disease to 3 years, survival is still best for those with non-metastasised disease. As the disease only becomes symptomatic at an advanced stage, worldwide organised screening programmes are being implemented, which aim to increase early detection and reduce morbidity and mortality from colorectal cancer.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Cancers (Basel)
                Cancers (Basel)
                cancers
                Cancers
                MDPI
                2072-6694
                04 June 2021
                June 2021
                : 13
                : 11
                : 2814
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Málaga (IBIMA), Unidad de Gestión Clínica de Endocrinología y Nutrición del Hospital Virgen de la Victoria, 29010 Málaga, Spain; hatim.boughanem@ 123456ibima.eu (H.B.); manuel.macias@ 123456ibima.eu (M.M.-G.)
                [2 ]Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Departament de Bioquímica i Biotecnologia, Unitat de Nutrició Humana, Hospital Universitari San Joan de Reus, 43201 Reus, Spain; silvia.canudas@ 123456gmail.com (S.C.); nancy.babio@ 123456urv.cat (N.B.); jordi.salas@ 123456urv.cat (J.S.-S.)
                [3 ]Institut d’Investigació Sanitària Pere Virgili (IISPV), 43204 Reus, Spain
                [4 ]Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII), Consorcio CIBER, M.P. Fisiopatología de la Obesidad y Nutrición (CIBERObn), 28220 Madrid, Spain
                [5 ]Department of Nutrition, Food Sciences and Gastronomy, Food Torribera Campus, School of Pharmacy and Food Sciences, University of Barcelona, Santa Coloma de Gramenet, 08921 Barcelona, Spain
                [6 ]Biochemical and Biotechnology Department, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences Human Nutrition Unit, Rovira and Virgili University, C/Sant Llorenç, 21, 43201 Reus, Spain
                [7 ]Open Evidence Research Group, Universitat Oberta de Catalunya, 08018 Barcelona, Spain
                [8 ]Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain
                [9 ]MRC Centre for Environment and Health, Department of Epidemiology & Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, St Mary’s Campus, Norfolk Place, London W2 1PG, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: pablo.hernandez@ 123456fimabis.org (P.H.-A.); nerea.becerra@ 123456uv.es (N.B.-T.); Tel.: +34-977-759-312 (P.H.-A. & N.B.-T.)
                [†]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                [‡]

                Senior authors.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7743-311X
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5630-1588
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9977-8976
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4429-6507
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3527-5277
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2700-7459
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6475-4704
                Article
                cancers-13-02814
                10.3390/cancers13112814
                8201292
                34200111
                78f4da96-debe-4c95-9ab1-30d0437c5927
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 06 May 2021
                : 31 May 2021
                Categories
                Systematic Review

                vitamin d intake,meta-analysis,systematic review,colorectal cancer,incidence,case-control,prospective

                Comments

                Comment on this article