OBJECTIVE: To review and summarize evidence from longitudinal studies on the association between circulating 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and the risk of ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: Relevant prospective cohort studies and nested case-control studies were identified by systematically searching Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Knowledge databases and by cross-referencing. The following data were extracted in a standardized manner from eligible studies: first author, publication year, country, study design, characteristics of the study population, duration of follow-up, OC incidence according to circulating vitamin D status and the respective relative risks, and covariates adjusted for in the analysis. Due to the heterogeneity of studies in categorizing circulating vitamin D levels, all results were recalculated for an increase of circulating 25(OH)D by 20ng/ml. Summary relative risks (RRs) were calculated using meta-analysis methods. RESULTS: Overall, ten individual-level studies were included that reported on the association between circulating vitamin D levels and OC incidence. Meta-analysis of studies on OC incidence resulted in a summary RR (95% confidence interval, CI) of 0.83 (0.63-1.08) for an increase of 25(OH)D by 20ng/ml (P=0.160). No indication for heterogeneity and publication bias was found. CONCLUSIONS: A tentative inverse association of circulating 25(OH)D with OC incidence was found, which did not reach statistical significance but which requires clarification by additional studies due to potentially high clinical and public health impact.
OBJECTIVE: To review and summarize evidence from longitudinal studies on the association between circulating 25 hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) and the risk of ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: Relevant prospective cohort studies and nested case-control studies were identified by systematically searching Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Knowledge databases and by cross-referencing. The following data were extracted in a standardized manner from eligible studies: first author, publication year, country, study design, characteristics of the study population, duration of follow-up, OC incidence according to circulating vitamin D status and the respective relative risks, and covariates adjusted for in the analysis. Due to the heterogeneity of studies in categorizing circulating vitamin D levels, all results were recalculated for an increase of circulating 25(OH)D by 20ng/ml. Summary relative risks (RRs) were calculated using meta-analysis methods. RESULTS: Overall, ten individual-level studies were included that reported on the association between circulating vitamin D levels and OC incidence. Meta-analysis of studies on OC incidence resulted in a summary RR (95% confidence interval, CI) of 0.83 (0.63-1.08) for an increase of 25(OH)D by 20ng/ml (P=0.160). No indication for heterogeneity and publication bias was found. CONCLUSIONS: A tentative inverse association of circulating 25(OH)D with OC incidence was found, which did not reach statistical significance but which requires clarification by additional studies due to potentially high clinical and public health impact.
Authors: Galina Lurie; Rayna K Matsuno; Lynne R Wilkens; Pamela J Thompson; Nicholas J Ollberding; Michael E Carney; Marc T Goodman Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2011-10-05 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Jue-Sheng Ong; Gabriel Cuellar-Partida; Yi Lu; Peter A Fasching; Alexander Hein; Stefanie Burghaus; Matthias W Beckmann; Diether Lambrechts; Els Van Nieuwenhuysen; Ignace Vergote; Adriaan Vanderstichele; Jennifer Anne Doherty; Mary Anne Rossing; Jenny Chang-Claude; Ursula Eilber; Anja Rudolph; Shan Wang-Gohrke; Marc T Goodman; Natalia Bogdanova; Thilo Dörk; Matthias Dürst; Peter Hillemanns; Ingo B Runnebaum; Natalia Antonenkova; Ralf Butzow; Arto Leminen; Heli Nevanlinna; Liisa M Pelttari; Robert P Edwards; Joseph L Kelley; Francesmary Modugno; Kirsten B Moysich; Roberta B Ness; Rikki Cannioto; Estrid Høgdall; Claus K Høgdall; Allan Jensen; Graham G Giles; Fiona Bruinsma; Susanne K Kjaer; Michelle At Hildebrandt; Dong Liang; Karen H Lu; Xifeng Wu; Maria Bisogna; Fanny Dao; Douglas A Levine; Daniel W Cramer; Kathryn L Terry; Shelley S Tworoger; Meir Stampfer; Stacey Missmer; Line Bjorge; Helga B Salvesen; Reidun K Kopperud; Katharina Bischof; Katja Kh Aben; Lambertus A Kiemeney; Leon Fag Massuger; Angela Brooks-Wilson; Sara H Olson; Valerie McGuire; Joseph H Rothstein; Weiva Sieh; Alice S Whittemore; Linda S Cook; Nhu D Le; C Blake Gilks; Jacek Gronwald; Anna Jakubowska; Jan Lubiński; Tomasz Kluz; Honglin Song; Jonathan P Tyrer; Nicolas Wentzensen; Louise Brinton; Britton Trabert; Jolanta Lissowska; John R McLaughlin; Steven A Narod; Catherine Phelan; Hoda Anton-Culver; Argyrios Ziogas; Diana Eccles; Ian Campbell; Simon A Gayther; Aleksandra Gentry-Maharaj; Usha Menon; Susan J Ramus; Anna H Wu; Agnieszka Dansonka-Mieszkowska; Jolanta Kupryjanczyk; Agnieszka Timorek; Lukasz Szafron; Julie M Cunningham; Brooke L Fridley; Stacey J Winham; Elisa V Bandera; Elizabeth M Poole; Terry K Morgan; Harvey A Risch; Ellen L Goode; Joellen M Schildkraut; Celeste L Pearce; Andrew Berchuck; Paul Dp Pharoah; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Puya Gharahkhani; Rachel E Neale; Penelope M Webb; Stuart MacGregor Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2016-09-04 Impact factor: 7.196