Obesity and colorectal cancer risk: A meta-analysis of cohort studies

来源 :World Journal of Gastroenterology | 被引量 : 0次 | 上传用户:haojie831001
下载到本地 , 更方便阅读
声明 : 本文档内容版权归属内容提供方 , 如果您对本文有版权争议 , 可与客服联系进行内容授权或下架
论文部分内容阅读
AIM: To evaluate the association between obesity and colorectal cancer risk. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to January 1, 2007. Cohort studies permitting the assessment of causal association between obesity and colorectal cancer, with clear definition of obesity and well-defined outcome of colorectal cancer were eligible. Study design, sample size at baseline, mean follow-up time, co-activators and study results were extracted. Pooled standardized effect sizes were calculated. RESULTS: The pooled relative risk (RR) of colorectal cancer was 1.37 (95% CI: 1.21-1.56) for overweight and obese men, 1.07 (95% CI: 0.97-1.18) for women measured by body mass index (BMI). The pooled RR for the highest vs the lowest quantiles of BMI was 1.59 (95% CI: 1.35-1.86) for men and 1.22 (95% CI: 1.08-1.39) for women at risk of colon cancer, 1.16 (95% CI: 0.93-1.46) for men and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.98-1.54) for women at risk of rectal cancer. The pooled RR for the highest vs the lowest quantiles of waist circumference was 1.68 (95% CI: 1.36-2.08) for men and 1.48 (95% CI: 1.19-1.84) for women at risk of colon cancer, 1.26 (95% CI: 0.90-1.77) for men and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.81-1.86) for women at risk of rectal cancer. The pooled RR for the highest quantiles vs the lowest quantiles of waist-to-hip ratio was 1.91 (95% CI: 1.46-2.49) for men and 1.49 (95% CI 1.23-1.81) for women at risk of colon cancer, 1.93 (95% CI: 1.19-3.13) for men and 1.20 (95% CI: 0.81-1.78) for women at risk of rectal cancer. Compared with ’normal range’, the pooled RR for proximal colon cancer was 1.14 (95% CI : 0.88-1.47) for the overweight and 1.41 (95% CI: 0.66-3.01) for the obese. The pooled RR for the highest quantiles vs the lowest quantiles was 2.05 (95% CI: 1.23-3.41) with waist circumference, 1.66 (95% CI: 0.69-3.99) with waist-to-hip ratio. Compared with’normal range’, the pooled RR for distal colon cancer was 1.38 (95% CI: 1.02-1.87) for the overweight and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.80-1.90) for the obese. The pooled RR for the highest quantiles vs the lowest quantiles was 1.86 (95% CI: 1.05-3.30) with waist circumference, and 1.79 (95% CI: 0.82-3.90) with waist-to-hip ratio. CONCLUSION: Obesity is a statistically significant risk factor for colorectal cancer and the relationship is more signifi cant in men than in women among different cancer subsites. Indexes of abdominal obesity are more sensitive than those of overall obesity. AIM: To evaluate the association between obesity and colorectal cancer risk. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to January 1, 2007. Cohort studies permitting the assessment of causal association between obesity and colorectal cancer, with clear definition of Obesity and well-defined outcome of colorectal cancer were eligible. RESULTS: The pooled relative risk (RR ) for colorectal cancer was 1.37 (95% CI: 1.21-1.56) for overweight and obese men, 1.07 (95% CI: 0.97-1.18) for women measured by body mass index (BMI). The pooled RR for the highest vs the the (95% CI: 1.35-1.86) for men and 1.22 (95% CI: 1.08-1.39) for women at risk of colon cancer, 1.16 (95% CI: 0.93-1.46) for men and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.98-1.54) for women at risk of rectal cancer. The pooled RR for the highest vs th for women at risk of colon cancer, 1.26 (95% CI: 0.90-1.77) for men and 1.48 (95% CI: 1.36-2.08) for men and 1.48 The pooled RR for the highest quantiles vs the lowest quantiles of waist-to-hip ratio was 1.91 (95% CI: 1.46-2.49) for men and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.81-1.86) for women at risk of rectal cancer for women at risk of colon cancer, 1.93 (95% CI: 1.19-3.13) for men and 1.20 (95% CI: 0.81-1.78) for women at risk of rectal cancer. The pooled RR for proximal colon cancer was 1.14 (95% CI: 0.88-1.47) for the overweight and 1.41 (95% CI: 0.66-3.01) for the obese. The pooled RR for the highest quantiles vs The 95% CI: 1.23-3.41 with waist circumference, 1.66 (95% CI: 0.69-3.99) with waist-to-hip ratio. was 1.38 (95% CI: 1.02-1.87) for the overweight and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.80-1.90)for the obese. The pooled RR for the highest quantiles vs the lowest quantiles was 1.86 (95% CI: 1.05-3.30) with waist circumference, and 1.79 (95% CI: 0.82-3.90) with waist- to-hip ratio. CONCLUSION : Obesity is a statistically significant risk factor for colorectal cancer and the relationship is more signifi cant in men than in women among different cancer subsites. Indexes of abdominal obesity are more sensitive than those of overall obesity.
其他文献
请下载后查看,本文暂不支持在线获取查看简介。 Please download to view, this article does not support online access to view profile.
期刊
泪腺脱垂在临床上并非罕见,手术是泪腺脱垂唯一有效的方法[1,2]。作者自1987-1994年共收治23例泪腺脱垂,采用泪腺内固定、眶隔加固联合双重睑成形术,术后经半年至7年随访观察,取得
我们于1991年1月至4月,试用含D一木糖的培养液培养小鼠晶体建立白内障形成的体外模型,并观察抗白内障药物苄达赖氨酸(BDZL)对白内障形成的拮抗作用。材料与方法一、晶体培养:昆明
为了研究前庭感觉细胞主动的机械转导功能,用酶解和机械方法分离了豚鼠的前庭感觉细胞。选取体重150~200g、耳廓反射正常的幼年豚鼠,以乙醚麻醉后断头,快速取出颞骨,分离出前
用牛血清白蛋白(BSA)全身免疫豚鼠,待血清抗体达高滴度水平后,再用BSA攻击豚鼠中耳腔,7d后处死豚鼠,透射电镜可以观察到实验性免疫反应性中耳炎耳蜗基底转外毛细胞线粒体变性,表面囊
切除甲状软骨板的宽度对甲状软骨成形术后效果的影响李国栋石福欣杨式麟(第二临床学院耳鼻咽喉科,沈阳110003)关键词甲状软骨成形术;甲状软骨板自田中信三应用甲状软骨成形术第Ⅲ型治疗
收治620例食管异物,最常见的异物是各种骨类。80%以上的异物嵌顿在颈部食管。诊断应结合病史、X线检查和食管镜检查。食管异物在诊断一作出就应立即取除,否则并发症的危险将增加
近日,拜耳材料科技宣布,与中国四川大学合作研发的新产品专利申请已初审合格。这一重要专利产品的特色是聚碳酸酯(PC)与聚乳酸(PLA)创新的混合工艺,改善了原有共混物的性能,
奥运会申办成功给北京经济发展带来的巨大动力显而易见,随着2008年的临近,一个悬念越发在人们的心头浮起:奥运会之后的北京还能保持住这样的势头吗?奥运会的赛后问题一直让经
为探讨甲状腺癌的最佳手术方式和最佳切口,本文回顾性分析1999年1月至2006年7月我科收治的64例分化型甲状腺癌(双侧颈清扫术)应用低领状切口的临床资料。报告如下。1临床资料