Jessica Citronberg1, Elizabeth D Kantor2, John D Potter3, Emily White1. 1. 1] Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA [2] Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA. 2. Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA. 3. 1] Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington, USA [2] Department of Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA [3] Centre for Public Health Research, Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Constipation and laxative use have been hypothesized to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, but existing epidemiologic studies have been inconclusive. To address this issue, the authors prospectively examined the association between CRC incidence and constipation, non-fiber laxative use, and fiber laxative use among 75,214 participants of the VITamins And Lifestyle study. METHODS: Information on bowel movement frequency as well as average 10-year non-fiber laxative use, fiber laxative use, and constipation was ascertained by means of a questionnaire. Patients were followed from the time of receipt of the baseline questionnaire (2000-2002) until 2008 for CRC incidence, over which time 558 incident CRC cases occurred. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Compared with individuals who used non-fiber laxatives less than once per year, the HRs associated with low (1-4 times per year) and high (≥5 times per year) use were 1.49 (95% CI: 1.04-2.14) and 1.43 (95% CI: 0.82-2.28), respectively (Ptrend=0.05). HRs for CRC were statistically significantly decreased and lowest in individuals who reported using fiber laxatives often (4+ days per week for 4+ years) vs. those who reported no use (HR=0.44; 95% CI: 0.21-0.95), although the trend was not significant (Ptrend=0.19). No statistically significant associations between bowel movement frequency or constipation and CRC risk were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study suggest that risk for CRC increases with non-fiber laxative use and decreases with fiber laxative use. However, further observational and experimental studies are needed to clarify these relationships before drawing conclusions about the preferred treatment of constipation.
OBJECTIVES:Constipation and laxative use have been hypothesized to increase colorectal cancer (CRC) risk, but existing epidemiologic studies have been inconclusive. To address this issue, the authors prospectively examined the association between CRC incidence and constipation, non-fiber laxative use, and fiber laxative use among 75,214 participants of the VITamins And Lifestyle study. METHODS: Information on bowel movement frequency as well as average 10-year non-fiber laxative use, fiber laxative use, and constipation was ascertained by means of a questionnaire. Patients were followed from the time of receipt of the baseline questionnaire (2000-2002) until 2008 for CRC incidence, over which time 558 incident CRC cases occurred. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the multivariate-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: Compared with individuals who used non-fiber laxatives less than once per year, the HRs associated with low (1-4 times per year) and high (≥5 times per year) use were 1.49 (95% CI: 1.04-2.14) and 1.43 (95% CI: 0.82-2.28), respectively (Ptrend=0.05). HRs for CRC were statistically significantly decreased and lowest in individuals who reported using fiber laxatives often (4+ days per week for 4+ years) vs. those who reported no use (HR=0.44; 95% CI: 0.21-0.95), although the trend was not significant (Ptrend=0.19). No statistically significant associations between bowel movement frequency or constipation and CRC risk were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Findings from this study suggest that risk for CRC increases with non-fiber laxative use and decreases with fiber laxative use. However, further observational and experimental studies are needed to clarify these relationships before drawing conclusions about the preferred treatment of constipation.
Authors: D S Alberts; M E Martínez; D J Roe; J M Guillén-Rodríguez; J R Marshall; J B van Leeuwen; M E Reid; C Ritenbaugh; P A Vargas; A B Bhattacharyya; D L Earnest; R E Sampliner Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2000-04-20 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Emily White; Ruth E Patterson; Alan R Kristal; Mark Thornquist; Irena King; Ann L Shattuck; Ilonka Evans; Jessie Satia-Abouta; Alyson J Littman; John D Potter Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2004-01-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: M Kojima; K Wakai; S Tokudome; K Tamakoshi; H Toyoshima; Y Watanabe; N Hayakawa; K Suzuki; S Hashimoto; Y Ito; A Tamakoshi Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2004-04-05 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Meghan B Skiba; Lindsay N Kohler; Tracy E Crane; Elizabeth T Jacobs; Aladdin H Shadyab; Ikuko Kato; Linda Snetselaar; Lihong Qi; Cynthia A Thomson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2019-08-27 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Michael Goodman; Robert H Fletcher; V Paul Doria-Rose; Christopher D Jensen; Alexis M Zebrowski; Tracy A Becerra; Virginia P Quinn; Ann G Zauber; Douglas A Corley; Chyke A Doubeni Journal: J Comp Eff Res Date: 2015-07-23 Impact factor: 1.744
Authors: Zhong Hui Liu; Dominic Chi Chung Foo; Wai Lun Law; Fion Siu Yin Chan; Joe King Man Fan; Jun Sheng Peng Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-10-31 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ramesh K Wali; Laura Bianchi; Sonia Kupfer; Mart De La Cruz; Borko Jovanovic; Christopher Weber; Michael J Goldberg; L M Rodriguez; Raymond Bergan; David Rubin; Mary Beth Tull; Ellen Richmond; Beth Parker; Seema Khan; Hemant K Roy Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-04-04 Impact factor: 3.240