Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta-Analyses

被引:38
|
作者
Sluyter, John D. [1 ]
Manson, JoAnn E. [2 ,3 ,4 ]
Scragg, Robert [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Auckland, Sch Populat Hlth, Private Bag 92019, Auckland 1142, New Zealand
[2] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Med, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[3] Harvard Med Sch, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Harvard TH Chan Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Epidemiol, Boston, MA USA
关键词
CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER MORTALITY; CIRCULATING 25-HYDROXYVITAMIN D; META-ANALYSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; VITAMIN D; CIRCULATING 25-HYDROXYVITAMIN D; D SUPPLEMENTATION; BREAST-CANCER; COLORECTAL-CANCER; D-RECEPTOR; THYROID-CANCER; FREE SURVIVAL; META-ANALYSIS; D DEFICIENCY; RISK;
D O I
10.1002/jbm4.10420
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
The relationship between vitamin D status or supplementation and cancer outcomes has been examined in several meta-analyses. To address remaining knowledge gaps, we conducted a systematic overview and critical appraisal of pertinent meta-analyses. For meta-analyses of trials, we assessed their quality using AMSTAR-2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews), strength of associations using umbrella review methodology and credibility of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria. Meta-analyses of observational studies reported inverse associations of 25OHD with risk of cancer incidence and cancer mortality and, particularly for colorectal cancer, fulfilled some of Bradford-Hill's causation criteria. In meta-analyses of trials, vitamin D supplementation did not affect cancer incidence. However, we found credible evidence that vitamin D supplementation reduced total cancer mortality risk, with five out of six meta-analyses reporting a relative risk (RR) reduction of up to 16%: RR, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.74-0.95). The strength of the association, however, was classified as weak. This was true among meta-analyses of high, moderate, and lower quality (AMSTAR-2-rated). Trials did not include large numbers of vitamin D-deficient participants; many tested relatively low doses and lacked sufficiently powered data on site-specific cancers. In conclusion, meta-analyses show that, although observational evidence indicates that low vitamin D status is associated with a higher risk of cancer outcomes, randomized trials show that vitamin D supplementation reduces total cancer mortality, but not cancer incidence. However, trials with larger proportions of vitamin D-insufficient participants and longer durations of follow-up, plus adequately powered data on site-specific common cancers, would provide further insight into the evidence base. (c) 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
引用
收藏
页数:18
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Vitamin D Supplementation and Fractures in Adults: A Systematic Umbrella Review of Meta-Analyses of Controlled Trials
    Chakhtoura, Marlene
    Bacha, Dania S.
    Gharios, Charbel
    Ajjour, Sara
    Assaad, Mariam
    Jabbour, Yara
    Kahale, Francesca
    Bassatne, Aya
    Antoun, Stephanie
    Akl, Elie A.
    Bouillon, Roger
    Lips, Paul
    Ebeling, Peter R.
    Fuleihan, Ghada El-Hajj
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM, 2022, 107 (03): : 882 - 898
  • [22] Malignant Melanoma: Vitamin D Status as a Risk and Prognostic Factor - Meta-analyses and Systematic Review
    Haddad, Sinan
    Weise, Julius johannes
    Wagenpfeil, Stefan
    Vogt, Thomas
    Reichrath, Joerg
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2025, 45 (01) : 27 - 37
  • [23] The association between Vitamin D Status and Melanoma Risk and Prognosis: Meta-Analyses and Systematic Review
    Haddad, S.
    Weise, J.
    Schoepe, J.
    Wagenpfeil, S.
    Vogt, T.
    Reichrath, J.
    EXPERIMENTAL DERMATOLOGY, 2024, 33 (03)
  • [24] Meta-Analyses of Vitamin D Intake, 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Status, Vitamin D Receptor Polymorphisms, and Colorectal Cancer Risk
    Touvier, Mathilde
    Chan, Doris S. M.
    Lau, Rosa
    Aune, Dagfinn
    Vieira, Rui
    Greenwood, Darren C.
    Kampman, Ellen
    Riboli, Elio
    Hercberg, Serge
    Norat, Teresa
    CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY BIOMARKERS & PREVENTION, 2011, 20 (05) : 1003 - 1016
  • [25] Meta-analyses in Cancer Clinical Trials: Principles and Pitfalls
    J. R. Benson
    K. Saeb-Parsy
    World Journal of Surgery, 2006, 30 : 1177 - 1183
  • [26] Meta-analyses in cancer clinical trials: Principles and pitfalls
    Benson, J. R.
    Saeb-Parsy, K.
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2006, 30 (07) : 1177 - 1183
  • [27] Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer: A Review of Meta-Analyses
    Bas P. L. Wijnhoven
    Jan J. B. van Lanschot
    Hugo W. Tilanus
    Ewout W. Steyerberg
    Ate van der Gaast
    World Journal of Surgery, 2009, 33 : 2606 - 2614
  • [28] Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Esophageal Cancer: A Review of Meta-Analyses
    Wijnhoven, Bas P. L.
    van Lanschot, Jan J. B.
    Tilanus, Hugo W.
    Steyerberg, Ewout W.
    van der Gaast, Ate
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2009, 33 (12) : 2606 - 2614
  • [29] Amphetamine exposure and birth outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analyses
    Shah, Prakesh
    Murphy, Kellie
    Ladhani, Noor
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2011, 204 : S240 - S240
  • [30] On meta-analyses of meta-analyses
    Ioannidis, JPA
    Lau, J
    LANCET, 1996, 348 (9029): : 756 - 756