| Literature DB >> 26967050 |
Jie Liu1, Feixiang Yuan1, Jian Gao2, Boer Shan3, Yulan Ren3, Huaying Wang3, Ying Gao1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Isoflavone from soy and other plants modulate hormonal effects in women, and the hormone disorder might result in different caners including endometrial cancer. However, it's effect on the risk of endometrial cancer is still inconclusive. We aimed to assess the effects of isoflavone on endometrial thickness, a risk factor of endometrial cancer in peri- and post-menopausal women.Entities:
Keywords: Gerotarget; endometrial thickness; isoflavone supplementation; meta-analysis; randomized controlled trials
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26967050 PMCID: PMC4951218 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.7959
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Figure 1Identification process for eligible studies
Characteristics of studies
| Reference | Year | Study design | Participants | No. of subjects | Geographic regions | Baseline endometrial thickness | Baseline endometrial thickness | Isoflavone dose (mg/d) | Source of isoflavone | Study duration (week) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| D.H.Upmlis et al. | 2000 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 122 | USA | 3.5±1.9 | 3.7±2.7 | 50 | Soy | 12 |
| G. E. Hale et al. | 2001 | Double-blind RCT | Perimenopausal | 24 | Austria | 7.09±2.85 | 6.46±1.7 | 50 | Red clover | 12 |
| Kyung K.Han et al. | 2002 | Double-blind RCT | Perimenopausal | 80 | Brazil | 3.3±0.1SE | 2.6±0.1SE | 100 | Isoflavone tablet | 16 |
| A.Sammartino et al. | 2003 | RCT | postmenopausal | 63 | Europe | 3.2(2.3-4.5) | 3.1(2.3-4.2) | 36 | Genistein | 48 |
| M.J.Murray et al. | 2003 | RCT | postmenopausal | 15 | USA | 3±1 | 3.6±1.6 | 120 | Isoflavone tablet | 24 |
| M.Penotti et al. | 2003 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 62 | Europe | 2.6±1.8 | 3.2±1.8 | 36 | Soy | 24 |
| A.Crisafulli et al. | 2004 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 60 | Europe | 3.2±0.25SE | 3.3±0.33SE | 54 | Isoflavone tablet | 48 |
| E.Nikander et al. | 2005 | double blind cross over RCT | postmenopausal | 56 | Europe | 2.4±1.5 | 2.1±1.1 | 114 | Isoflavone tablet | 12 |
| M.Imhof et al. | 2006 | crossover RCT | postmenopausal | 109 | Austria | / | / | 80 | Red clover | 13 |
| E.A.P.Nahas et al. | 2007 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 76 | Brazil | 3median(2.2-4.1) 25-75th | 3.7median(2.6-4.1) 25-75th | 100 | Glycine max | 40 |
| G.Cheng et al. | 2007 | Double-blind prospective randomized study | postmenopausal | 51 | Europe | 2.3±1.1 | 2±1 | 60 | Soya beans | 12 |
| H.Marini et al. | 2007 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 389 | Italy | 3.1±1.5 | 3.2±1.8 | 54 | Isoflavone tablet | 104 |
| G.Zhang et al. | 2007 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 100 | China | 1.82±0.62 | 1.75±0.58 | 18 | Isoflavone tablet | 12 |
| J.Manonai et al. | 2008 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 71 | Asia | 4.07±1.48 | 4.07±1.39 | 20,30,50 | Pueraria mirifica | 24 |
| T.J.Powles et al. | 2008 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 401 | England | / | / | 40 | Red clover | 156 |
| A.M.Kenny et al. | 2009 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 66 | USA | 2.97±0.81 | 3.14±0.81 | 57 | Soy | 52 |
| R.D'Anna et al. | 2009 | RCT | postmenopausal | 397 | Europe | 3.1±0.1SE | 3.2±0.1SE | 54 | Isoflavone tablet | 104 |
| F.M.Steinberg et al. | 2011 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 268 | Multicenter | 1.8±0.98 | 2±1.22 | 102.3 | Synthetic | 104 |
| M.Evans et al. | 2011 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 83 | Canada | 4.28±1.98 | 3.66±1.21 | 30 | Synthetic | 12 |
| A.Oyama et al. | 2012 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 68 | Japan | 0.2±0.8 | 0.1±0.5 | 5 | Soy germ fermentation | 12 |
| A.M.Quaas et al. | 2013 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 224 | USA | 2.4±1 | 2.5±1.1 | 154 | Isolated soy protein | 156 |
| N.Colacurci et al. | 2013 | RCT | postmenopausal | 124 | Europe | 3.35±0.95 | 3.47±1.07 | 60 | Isoflavone tablet | 48 |
| D.L.Alekel et al. | 2014 | Double-blind RCT | postmenopausal | 168 | USA | 1.7±1.1 | 1.3±0.65 | 120 | Soy bean | 156 |
All values are the means ±SDs, means ±SEs, mean (range), median (25th-75th range), or mean (95%CI) reported in the trial
T: treatment group, C: control group
Figure 2Meta-analysis of the effect of isoflavone supplementation on endometrial thickness
The sizes of the data markers indicate the weight of each study in the analysis.
Subgroup analyses for the effect of oral isoflavone supplementation on endothelial thickness
| Study number | Number of subjects | SMD | P | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | ||||
| ≤60y | 20 | 1931 | −0.02(−0.22,0.18) | 0.84 |
| >60y | 3 | 336 | −0.24(−0.75,0.26) | |
| Daily Isoflavone dose | ||||
| ≤54mg/d | 13 | 1183 | 0.15(−0.08,0.38) | 0.007 |
| >54mg/d | 10 | 984 | −0.26(−0.45,−0.07) | |
| Total isoflavone dose | ||||
| ≤14000mg | 12 | 767 | −0.09(−0.27,0.08) | 0.30 |
| >14000mg | 11 | 1400 | −0.02(−0.32,0.28) | |
| BMI | ||||
| ≤25kg/m2 | 11 | 1137 | 0.05(−0.24,0.35) | 0.07 |
| >25kg/m2 | 9 | 760 | −0.19(−0.40,0.01) | |
| Geographic regions | ||||
| North America | 7 | 726 | −0.04(−0.58,0.50) | 0.04 |
| South America | 2 | 156 | −0.23(−0.44,−0.01) | |
| Asia | 3 | 224 | 0.23(−0.04,0.50) | |
| Australia | 2 | 116 | −0.18(−0.62,0.26) | |
| Europe | 9 | 945 | 0.01(−0.34,0.36) |
SMD: standard mean difference
P value is from the meta-analysis of total effect of each subgroup, assessed by random-effect models
Figure 3Meta-analysis of subgroup by geographic regions of study objects
The sizes of the data markers indicate the weight of each study in the analysis. The geographic region is differentiated by study geographic region reported by trials.
Figure 5Funnel plot (with pseudo 95% CIs) of all individual studies in the meta-analysis
Studies that evaluated the effect of oral isoflavone supplementation on endometrial thickness change were plotted with standard mean differences (SMDs) on the vertical axis and the SEs of the SMDs along the horizontal axis. Graph symbols were sized by weights