| Literature DB >> 29665798 |
Jie You1, Yafei Sun1, Yacong Bo1, Yiwei Zhu1, Dandan Duan1, Han Cui1, Quanjun Lu2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Isoflavones, a class of phytoestrogenic compounds, are abundant in soybeans. A number of epidemiological studies have investigated the association between dietary isoflavones intake and the risk of gastric cancer. However, the results are inconclusive. Therefore, the meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the effect of dietary isoflavones intake on the risk of gastric cancer.Entities:
Keywords: Dietary isoflavones intake; Gastric cancer; Meta-analysis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29665798 PMCID: PMC5905165 DOI: 10.1186/s12889-018-5424-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Fig. 1A flow diagram for selection studies and exclusion reason for the meta-analysis
Characteristics of studies on dietary isoflavones intake and risk of gastric cancer
| First author(year) | Study design | Source of control | Age (y) | Dietary assessment | Participants | Intake comparison, high vs. Low (mg/d) | OR (95%CI) for highest vs. lowest category | NOS Score | Adjustment for covariates |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hara (2012) | Cohort | Population | 45–74 | Validated FFQ | 84,881 | M: 42.3 vs. 9.2 a | M: 1 (0.81–1.24) | 9 | Age, public health center area, BMI, smoking, family history, ethanol, vegetable and fruit intake, fish intake, salt intake, and total energy intake, menopausal status |
| Wada (2015) | Cohort | Population | > 35 | 169-item FFQ | 30,792 | M: 75.5 vs. 17.6 a | M: 0.81 (0.60–1.09) | 9 | Age, BMI, physical activity, smoking status, alcohol intake, salt intake, education, menopausal status |
| Rossi (2010) | Case-control | Hospital | 22–80 | Validated FFQ | 777 | > 34.3 vs. < 15.0 | 0.88 (0.53–1.46) | 8 | Sex, age, education, calendar year of interview, BMI, smoking intake, total energy intake |
| Lagiou (2004) | Case-control | Hospital | NR | Validated FFQ | 210 | 2.85 vs. 0.01 a | 1.16 (0.73–1.84) | 7.5 | Age, sex, place of birth, BMI, height, education, smoking and alcohol consumption, total energy intake, fruit and vegetable intake |
| Petrick (2015) | Case-control | Population | 30–79 | 104-item FFQ | 1913 | GCA:0.6 vs. 0.27 a | GCA:1.56 (0.93–2.6) | 9 | Proxy status, income, education, BMI, cigarette and alcohol consumption |
| Woo (2014) | Case-control | Hospital | 35–75 | 103-item FFQ | 334 | 43.7 vs. 11.4 a | M:0.98 (0.56–1.73) | 6 | Age, BMI, total energy intake, H.pyloristatus, occupation, smoking and alcohol intake, meat intake, fruits and vegetables intake, physical activity |
| Zamora-Ros (2012) Europe [ | Cohort | Population | 35–70 | Validated FFQ | 477,312 | > 1.1 vs. < 0.3 | M: 0.77 (0.5–1.18) | 9 | Age, BMI, education, smoking, alcohol, physical activity, energy intake, fruit and vegetables intake, red and processed meat intake |
Abbreviations: NR not report, OG gastric adenocarcinoma, GCA gastric cardia adenocarcinoma, F female, M male, OR odds ratio
a Median
Fig. 2Forest plots for the association between dietary isoflavones intake and gastric cancer risk (highest vs. lowest categories)
Subgroup analysis of dietary isoflavones intake and gastric cancer risk
| Subgroup | Number of participants | Number of studies | OR (95% CI) | Analysis model | Heterogeneity test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||
| All studies | 596,553 | 12 | 0.97 (0.87–1.09) | Fixed | 27.5 | 0.174 |
| Study design | ||||||
| Cohort | 592,985 | 6 | 0.91 (0.80–1.04) | Fixed | 15.2 | 0.316 |
| Case-control | 3568 | 6 | 1.15 (0.93–1.43) | Fixed | 15.4 | 0.315 |
| Sex | ||||||
| Male | 196,443 | 4 | 0.91 (0.78–1.06) | Fixed | 0 | 0.576 |
| Female | 397,210 | 4 | 0.89 (0.71–1.13) | Fixed | 34.1 | 0.208 |
| Mixed | 2900 | 4 | 1.25 (0.98–1.59) | Fixed | 8.6 | 0.350 |
| Geographic area | ||||||
| Europe and America | 480,212 | 6 | 1.11 (0.91–1.34) | Fixed | 29.2 | 0.316 |
| Asia | 116,341 | 6 | 0.91 (0.79–1.05) | Fixed | 12.5 | 0.335 |
| Source of control | ||||||
| Population | 594,898 | 8 | 0.98 (0.86–1.11) | Fixed | 48.5 | 0.059 |
| Hospital | 1655 | 4 | 0.96 (0.73–1.26) | Fixed | 0 | 0.663 |
| Sample size | ||||||
| ≥ 750 | 595,675 | 7 | 0.99 (0.87–1.12) | Random | 51.9 | 0.052 |
| < 750 | 878 | 5 | 0.93 (0.74–1.17) | Fixed | 0 | 0.640 |
| Dietary assessment | ||||||
| > 100 items | 595,566 | 10 | 0.97 (0.86–1.09) | Fixed | 37.8 | 0.107 |
| ≤ 100 items | 987 | 2 | 1.02 (0.73–1.44) | 0 | 0.430 | |
| Adjustments | ||||||
| Family history, yes | 84,881 | 2 | 1.02 (0.85–1.22) | Fixed | 0 | 0.737 |
| No | 511,672 | 10 | 0.94 (0.82–1.09) | 38.6 | 0.101 | |
| Dietary energy intake, yes | 478,967 | 8 | 0.98 (0.85–1.12) | Random | 0 | 0.868 |
| No | 32,705 | 4 | 0.97 (0.79–1.18) | 75 | 0.007 | |
Fig. 3Funnel plots of dietary isoflavones intake and the risk of gastric cancer