PURPOSE:Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) was one of the earliest agents investigated as a drug for colorectal cancer prevention. However, UDCA failed to show efficacy to prevent the development of colorectal adenomas in a large, phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. We re-evaluated the effect of UDCA in men and women separately, based on sex-specific differences in bile acid metabolism and suspected variation in etiologic factors contributing to colorectal cancer risk. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a secondary analysis of the efficacy of UDCA to prevent colorectal adenoma in men (n = 804) and women (n = 388). RESULTS: We found no reduction in risk of any metachronous adenoma with UDCA treatment in men or women. However, UDCA treatment significantly lowered the odds of advanced lesions [odds ratio (OR), 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.43-0.89] in men, but not women. We also observed significantly higher odds of advanced lesions with UDCA treatment in women who were younger (age, <65 years; OR, 3.24; 95% CI, 1.10-9.56), obese (body mass index, > or = 30 kg/m(2); OR, 5.45; 95% CI, 1.42-20.9), or in the highest tertile of total dietary fat (> or = 56.2 g/day; OR, 3.48; 95% CI, 1.35-8.95). In a multivariate model, the interactive effect of fat intake accounted for the modulating effects of age and body mass index in women. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the use of UDCA for preventing advanced colorectal adenomas in men. The increased odds of adenoma among women with high fat intake suggest a previously unrecognized harm that warrants further study, especially given the chronic exposure to UDCA in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and the increasing investigational use of UDCA for several other conditions.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE:Ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA) was one of the earliest agents investigated as a drug for colorectal cancer prevention. However, UDCA failed to show efficacy to prevent the development of colorectal adenomas in a large, phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. We re-evaluated the effect of UDCA in men and women separately, based on sex-specific differences in bile acid metabolism and suspected variation in etiologic factors contributing to colorectal cancer risk. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a secondary analysis of the efficacy of UDCA to prevent colorectal adenoma in men (n = 804) and women (n = 388). RESULTS: We found no reduction in risk of any metachronous adenoma with UDCA treatment in men or women. However, UDCA treatment significantly lowered the odds of advanced lesions [odds ratio (OR), 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.43-0.89] in men, but not women. We also observed significantly higher odds of advanced lesions with UDCA treatment in women who were younger (age, <65 years; OR, 3.24; 95% CI, 1.10-9.56), obese (body mass index, > or = 30 kg/m(2); OR, 5.45; 95% CI, 1.42-20.9), or in the highest tertile of total dietary fat (> or = 56.2 g/day; OR, 3.48; 95% CI, 1.35-8.95). In a multivariate model, the interactive effect of fat intake accounted for the modulating effects of age and body mass index in women. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the use of UDCA for preventing advanced colorectal adenomas in men. The increased odds of adenoma among women with high fat intake suggest a previously unrecognized harm that warrants further study, especially given the chronic exposure to UDCA in patients with primary biliary cirrhosis and the increasing investigational use of UDCA for several other conditions.
Authors: Umut Ozcan; Erkan Yilmaz; Lale Ozcan; Masato Furuhashi; Eric Vaillancourt; Ross O Smith; Cem Z Görgün; Gökhan S Hotamisligil Journal: Science Date: 2006-08-25 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: María Dolores Yago; Victoria González; Pilar Serrano; Rafael Calpena; María Alba Martínez; Emilio Martínez-Victoria; Mariano Mañas Journal: Nutrition Date: 2005-03 Impact factor: 4.008
Authors: David S Alberts; María Elena Martínez; Lisa M Hess; Janine G Einspahr; Sylvan B Green; A K Bhattacharyya; Jose Guillen; Mary Krutzsch; Ashok K Batta; Gerald Salen; Liane Fales; Kris Koonce; Dianne Parish; Mary Clouser; Denise Roe; Peter Lance Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2005-06-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: D L Earnest; H Holubec; R K Wali; C S Jolley; M Bissonette; A K Bhattacharyya; H Roy; S Khare; T A Brasitus Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1994-10-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Christine L Sardo Molmenti; Elizabeth A Hibler; Erin L Ashbeck; Cynthia A Thomson; David O Garcia; Denise Roe; Robin B Harris; Peter Lance; Martin Cisneroz; Maria Elena Martinez; Patricia A Thompson; Elizabeth T Jacobs Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2014-07-25 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Alexander Khoruts; Michael J Sadowsky; Christopher Staley; Alexa R Weingarden Journal: Appl Microbiol Biotechnol Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: Elizabeth T Jacobs; Mark R Haussler; David S Alberts; Lindsay N Kohler; Peter Lance; María Elena Martínez; Denise J Roe; Peter W Jurutka Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2016-05-02
Authors: Elizabeth A Hibler; Christine L Sardo Molmenti; Peter Lance; Peter W Jurutka; Elizabeth T Jacobs Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Talima Pearson; J Gregory Caporaso; Monica Yellowhair; Nicholas A Bokulich; Megha Padi; Denise J Roe; Betsy C Wertheim; Mark Linhart; Jessica A Martinez; Cherae Bilagody; Heidie Hornstra; David S Alberts; Peter Lance; Patricia A Thompson Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2019-01-16 Impact factor: 4.452