scholarly journals Breast Cancer Primary Prevention and Diet: An Umbrella Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (13) ◽  
pp. 4731 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Buja ◽  
Marco Pierbon ◽  
Laura Lago ◽  
Giulia Grotto ◽  
Vincenzo Baldo
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Healthy Eating ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Citrus Fruit ◽  
Inverse Association ◽  
Critical Approach ◽  
Umbrella Review ◽  
Eating Style ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Risk Of Cancer

Introduction: Many studies have been published, but none have pooled the useful evidence available in the literature to produce guidelines and health policies promoting healthy eating styles to prevent breast cancer (BC). The present study aimed to summarize the evidence produced to date, taking a judicious, critical approach to the quality of the studies analyzed. Methods: An umbrella review method was adopted, which is a systematic review of second-level studies, meta-analyses and literature reviews. Results: In all, 48 studies were considered: 32 meta-analyses, 4 pooled analyses, 5 systematic reviews, and 7 qualitative reviews. A higher intake of total meat, or red or processed meats, or foods with a high glycemic index, or eggs would seem to be associated with a higher risk of BC. Some foods, such as vegetables, would seem instead to have an inverse association with BC risk. One meta-analysis revealed an inverse association between citrus fruit and mushroom consumption and BC. Some nutrients, such as calcium, folate, vitamin D, lignans and carotenoids, also seem to be inversely associated with BC risk. The evidence is still conflicting as concerns exposure to other dietary elements (e.g., polyunsaturated fatty acids, dairy foods). Conclusion: Nutrition is one of the most modifiable aspects of people’s lifestyles and dietary choices can affect health and the risk of cancer. Overall, adhering to a healthy eating style may be associated with a significant reduction in the risk of BC.

scholarly journals Association of Total Nut, Tree Nut, Peanut, and Peanut Butter Consumption with Cancer Incidence and Mortality: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sina Naghshi ◽  
Mehdi Sadeghian ◽  
Morteza Nasiri ◽  
Sara Mobarak ◽  
Masoomeh Asadi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dose Response ◽  
Cancer Mortality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Peanut Butter ◽  
Inverse Association ◽  
Tree Nuts ◽  
Tree Nut ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Risk Of Cancer ◽  
Nut Intake

ABSTRACT Data on the association of nut intake with risk of cancer and its mortality are conflicting. Although previous meta-analyses summarized available findings in this regard, some limitations may distort their findings. Moreover, none of these meta-analyses examined the dose-response associations of total nut intake with the risk of specific cancers as well as associations between specific types of nuts and cancer mortality. Therefore, this study aimed to summarize available findings on the associations of total nut (tree nuts and peanuts), tree nut (walnuts, pistachios, macadamia nuts, pecans, cashews, almonds, hazelnuts, and Brazil nuts), peanut (whole peanuts without considering peanut butter), and peanut butter consumption with risk of cancer and its mortality by considering the above-mentioned points. We searched the online databases until March 2020 to identify eligible articles. In total, 43 articles on cancer risk and 9 articles on cancer mortality were included in the current systematic review and meta-analysis. The summary effect size (ES) for risk of cancer, comparing the highest with lowest intakes of total nuts, was 0.86 (95% CI: 0.81, 0.92, P < 0.001, I2 = 58.1%; P < 0.01), indicating a significant inverse association. Such a significant inverse association was also seen for tree nut intake (pooled ES: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.78–0.96, P < 0.01, I2 = 15.8%; P = 0.28). Based on the dose-response analysis, a 5-g/d increase in total nut intake was associated with 3%, 6%, and 25% lower risks of overall, pancreatic, and colon cancers, respectively. In terms of cancer mortality, we found 13%, 18%, and 8% risk reductions with higher intakes of total nuts, tree nuts, and peanuts, respectively. In addition, a 5-g/d increase in total nut intake was associated with a 4% lower risk of cancer mortality. In conclusion, our findings support the protective association between total nut and tree nut intake and the risk of cancer and its mortality.

Meta-analysis of cancer risk among users of insulin glargine.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1510-1510
Author(s):  
Alice Koechlin ◽  
Mathieu Boniol ◽  
Chris Robertson ◽  
Geremia Bolli ◽  
Julio Rosenstock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Insulin Glargine ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Short Exposure ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Risk Of Cancer

1510 Background: The association between diabetes, its risk factors and treatments, and cancer risk and death is now high on the clinical and research agenda. Methods: All data regarding cancer risk and use of insulin glargine has been assembled and meta-analyses performed using state-of-the-art statistical methodology. Glargine is the most studied insulin in this regard. A random effects model was employed with tests for heterogeneity (I2) and publication bias. These meta-analyses are based on reports from epidemiological studies involving a total of 907,008 diabetic subjects and 2,597,602 person-years of observation. Results: Based on independent estimates from 14 studies, the Summary Relative Risk (SRR) for all forms of cancer was (SRR=0.90, 95% CI (0.82, 0.98)) and for breast cancer SRR=1.14 (95% CI (1.00, 1.29)). For new users of glargine, from 7 studies, the SRR for breast cancer was SRR=1.20 (95% CI (0.90, 1.58)). Based on independent estimates for 9 studies, for colorectal cancer the SRR was 0.73 (95% CI (0.59, 0.91)) and for prostate cancer SRR=1.16 (95% CI (1.03, 1.30)). Overall, the risk of developing cancer among users of insulin glargine is reduced compared to the risk of users of other insulins. Similarly, the risk of colorectal cancer is reduced among users of glargine. While above unity, the risks of breast cancer and prostate cancer are increased marginally. Potential limitations to this meta-analysis include that the comparison group was not the same in all studies but this could also be seen as a strength. This is not likely to invalidate the findings of this analysis nor would the fact that different adjustments were made in the individual studies. Conclusions: The current evidence gives no support to the hypothesis that insulin glargine is associated with an increased risk of cancer as compared to other insulins and should give reassurance to physicians and their patients. Given the short exposure time possible to glargine (less than 5 years maximum), it is not biologically plausible to have a causal link to common forms of cancer.

scholarly journals The association between XRCC3 rs1799794 polymorphism and cancer risk: a meta-analysis of 34 case–control studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Weiqing Liu ◽  
Shumin Ma ◽  
Lei Liang ◽  
Zhiyong Kou ◽  
Hongbin Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Thyroid Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Cancer Type ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Risk Of Cancer

Abstract Background Studies on the XRCC3 rs1799794 polymorphism show that this polymorphism is involved in a variety of cancers, but its specific relationships or effects are not consistent. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the association between rs1799794 polymorphism and susceptibility to cancer. Methods PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched for eligible studies through June 11, 2019. All analyses were performed with Stata 14.0. Subgroup analyses were performed by cancer type, ethnicity, source of control, and detection method. A total of 37 studies with 23,537 cases and 30,649 controls were included in this meta-analysis. Results XRCC3 rs1799794 increased cancer risk in the dominant model and heterozygous model (GG + AG vs. AA: odds ratio [OR] = 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.00–1.08, P = 0.051; AG vs. AA: OR = 1.05, 95% CI = 1.00–1.01, P = 0.015). The existence of rs1799794 increased the risk of breast cancer and thyroid cancer, but reduced the risk of ovarian cancer. In addition, rs1799794 increased the risk of cancer in the Caucasian population. Conclusion This meta-analysis confirms that XRCC3 rs1799794 is related to cancer risk, especially increased risk for breast cancer and thyroid cancer and reduced risk for ovarian cancer. However, well-designed large-scale studies are required to further evaluate the results.

scholarly journals Resting Heart Rate as a Predictor of Cancer Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (7) ◽  
pp. 1354
Author(s):  
Diana P. Pozuelo-Carrascosa ◽  
Iván Cavero-Redondo ◽  
I.M. Lee ◽  
Celia Álvarez-Bueno ◽  
Sara Reina-Gutierrez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Heart Rate ◽  
Cancer Mortality ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Resting Heart Rate ◽  
Potential Marker ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Risk Of Cancer ◽  
The Relationship

This work was aimed to synthetize the evidence available about the relationship between resting heart rate (RHR) and the risk of cancer mortality. A computerized search in the Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from their inception to 24 September 2020 was performed. We performed three meta-analyses: (1) cancer mortality comparing the “less than 60 bpm” and “more than 60 bpm” categories; (2) cancer mortality comparing “less than 60 bpm”, “60 to 80 bpm”, and “more than 80 bpm” categories; and (3) analysis for 10–12 and 20 bpm increase in RHR and risk of cancer mortality. Twenty-two studies were included in the qualitative review, and twelve of them met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. Our results showed a positive association between RHR and the risk of cancer mortality. This association was shown in a meta-analysis comparing studies reporting mean RHR values below and above 60 bpm, when comparing three RHR categories using less than 60 bpm as the reference category and, finally, in dose response analyses estimating the effect of an increase of 10–12 bpm in RHR, both in men and in women. In conclusion, a low RHR is a potential marker of low risk of cancer mortality.

Does Locoregional Radiation Therapy Improve Survival in Breast Cancer? A Meta-Analysis

2000 ◽  
Vol 18 (6) ◽  
pp. 1220-1229 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy J. Whelan ◽  
Jim Julian ◽  
Jim Wright ◽  
Alejandro R. Jadad ◽  
Mark L. Levine
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Radiation Therapy ◽  
Systemic Therapy ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Radical Mastectomy ◽  
Node Positive ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Positive Breast Cancer

PURPOSE: Recent randomized trials in women with node-positive breast cancer who received systemic treatment report that locoregional radiation therapy improves survival. Previous trials failed to detect a difference in survival that results from its use. A systematic review of randomized trials that examine the effectiveness of locoregional radiation therapy in patients treated by definitive surgery and adjuvant systemic therapy was conducted. METHODS: Randomized trials published between 1967 and 1999 were identified through MEDLINE database, CancerLit database, and reference lists of relevant articles. Relevant data was abstracted. The results of randomized trials were pooled using meta-analyses to estimate the effect of treatment on any recurrence, locoregional recurrence, and mortality. RESULTS: Eighteen trials that involved a total of 6,367 patients were identified. Most trials included both pre- and postmenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer treated with modified radical mastectomy. The type of systemic therapy received, sites irradiated, techniques used, and doses of radiation delivered varied between trials. Data on toxicity were infrequently reported. Radiation was shown to reduce the risk of any recurrence (odds ratio, 0.69; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.83), local recurrence (odds ratio, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.34), and mortality (odds ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.94). CONCLUSION: Locoregional radiation after surgery in patients treated with systemic therapy reduced mortality. Several questions remain on how these results should be translated into current-day clinical practice.

scholarly journals Obsessive healthy eating and orthorexic eating tendencies in sport and exercise contexts: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jana Strahler ◽  
Hanna Wachten ◽  
Anett Mueller-Alcazar
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Gender Differences ◽  
Healthy Eating ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Group Analysis ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Exercise Behaviors ◽  
Sport And Exercise ◽  
Underlying Mechanisms ◽  
Meta Analyses

AbstractBackgroundOrthorexia Nervosa (ON) and exercise addiction (ExAdd) are two phenomena believed to overlap. We conducted a meta-analysis exploring the link between ON and (addictive) exercise behaviors.MethodsA systematic review of major databases and gray literature was carried out for studies reporting on ON and (addictive) exercise behaviors. Random effects meta-analyses were undertaken calculating correlations between ON and (addictive) exercise behaviors. A sub-group analysis investigated gender differences.ResultsTwenty-five studies with 10,134 participants (mean age = 25.21; 56.4% female) were included. Analyses showed a small overall correlation between ON and exercise (21 studies, r = 0.12, 95% CI |0.06–0.18|) and a medium overall correlation between ON and ExAdd (7 studies, r = 0.29, 95% CI |0.13–0.45|). Gender differences were negligible.ConclusionsOrthorexic eating correlated slightly and moderately with exercise and ExAdd, respectively, expressing some unique and shared variance of these behaviors. While this does not suggest ON and addictive exercising to be independent, it does not indicate substantial comorbidity. Future research should focus on clinical relevance, underlying mechanisms, vulnerability, and risk factors.

scholarly journals Non-pharmacological treatments for irritable bowel syndrome: study protocol of an umbrella review of systematic review and meta-analyses

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. e027778 ◽  
Author(s):  
Song Jin ◽  
Yi-Fan Li ◽  
Di Qin ◽  
Dan-Qing Luo ◽  
Hong Guo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Irritable Bowel Syndrome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Small Study ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Pharmacological Treatments ◽  
Umbrella Review ◽  
Study Heterogeneity ◽  
Ethical Approval ◽  
Irritable Bowel ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionNon-pharmacological treatments are used in the management of irritable bowel syndrome, and their effectiveness has been evaluated in multiple meta-analyses. The robustness of the results in the meta-analyses was not evaluated. We aimed to assess whether there is evidence of diverse biases in the meta-analyses and to identify the treatments without evidence of risk of bias.Methods and analysisWe will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and CINAHL Plus for meta-analyses that evaluate the effectiveness of non-pharmacological treatments. The time of publication will be limited from inception to December 2018. The credibility of the meta-analyses will be evaluated by assessing between-study heterogeneity, small-study effect and excess significance bias. The between-study heterogeneity will be assessed using the Cochrane’s Q test, and the extent of the heterogeneity will be classified using the I2statistics. The existence of a small-study effect in a meta-analysis will be evaluated using the funnel plot method and confirmed by Egger’s test. Excess significance bias will be evaluated by comparing the expected number of clinical studies with positive findings with the observed number.Ethics and disseminationNo formal ethical approval is required since we will use publicly available data. We will disseminate the findings of the umbrella review through publication in a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentations.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42018111516.

scholarly journals Management of haemorrhoids: protocol of an umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. e035287
Author(s):  
Min Chen ◽  
Tai-Chun Tang ◽  
Tao-Hong He ◽  
Yong-Jun Du ◽  
Di Qin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Random Effect Model ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Umbrella Review ◽  
Effect Model ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
The Impact

IntroductionThe prevalence of haemorrhoidal diseases was high in general population, and many treatments are proposed for the management of haemorrhoids. The treatments include conservative and surgical interventions; the credibility and strength of current evidence of their effectiveness are not comprehensively evaluated. We aim to evaluate the credibility of systematic reviews and meta-analyses that assess the effectiveness of the treatments for haemorrhoidal diseases through an umbrella review.Methods and analysisWe will search Ovid Medline, Embase, Cochrane library and Web of Science from inception to March 2020 without any language restriction. We will include meta-analyses that examine the effectiveness of treatments in the management of haemorrhoids. Two reviewers will independently screen the titles and abstracts of retrieved articles, and they will extract data from the included meta-analyses. For each meta-analysis, we will estimate the effect size of a treatment through the random-effect model and the fixed-effect model, and we will evaluate between-study heterogeneity (Cochrane’s Q and I2statistics) and small-study effect (Egger’s test); we will also estimate the evidence of excess significance bias. Evidence of each treatment will be graded according to prespecified criteria. Methodological quality of each meta-analysis will be evaluated by using Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews 2. The corrected cover area method will be used to assess the impact of overlap in reviews on the findings of the umbrella review.Ethics and disseminationWe will present the results of the umbrella review at conferences and publish the final report in a peer-reviewed journal. The umbrella review does not require ethical approval.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42019140702.

scholarly journals Consumption of Fish and ω-3 Fatty Acids and Cancer Risk: An Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Observational Studies

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 1134-1149 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keum Hwa Lee ◽  
Hyo Jin Seong ◽  
Gaeun Kim ◽  
Gwang Hun Jeong ◽  
Jong Yeob Kim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Fatty Acids ◽  
Fatty Acid ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Fatty Acid Intake ◽  
Umbrella Review ◽  
Acid Intake ◽  
Weak Evidence ◽  
Meta Analyses

ABSTRACT Multiple studies have suggested that ω-3 fatty acid intake may have a protective effect on cancer risk; however, its true association with cancer risk remains controversial. We performed an umbrella review of meta-analyses to summarize and evaluate the evidence for the association between ω-3 fatty acid intake and cancer outcomes. We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to December 1, 2018. We included meta-analyses of observational studies that examined associations between intake of fish or ω-3 fatty acid and cancer risk (gastrointestinal, liver, breast, gynecologic, prostate, brain, lung, and skin) and determined the level of evidence of associations. In addition, we appraised the quality of the evidence of significant meta-analyses by using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. We initially screened 598 articles, and 15 articles, including 57 meta-analyses, were eligible. Among 57 meta-analyses, 15 reported statistically significant results. We found that 12 meta-analyses showed weak evidence of an association between ω-3 fatty acid intake and risk of the following types of cancer: liver cancer (n = 4 of 6), breast cancer (n = 3 of 14), prostate cancer (n = 3 of 11), and brain tumor (n = 2 of 2). In the other 3 meta-analyses, studies of endometrial cancer and skin cancer, there were no assessable data for determining the evidence levels. No meta-analysis showed convincing, highly suggestive, or suggestive evidence of an association. In the sensitivity analysis of meta-analyses by study design, we found weak associations between ω-3 fatty acid intake and breast cancer risk in cohort studies, but no statistically significant association in case-control studies. However, the opposite results were found in case of brain tumor risk. Although ω-3 fatty acids have been studied in several meta-analyses with regard to a wide range of cancer outcomes, only weak associations were identified in some cancer types, with several limitations. Considering the nonsignificant or weak evidence level, clinicians and researchers should cautiously interpret reported associations between ω-3 fatty acid consumption and cancer risks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document