| Literature DB >> 29936714 |
Shoboo Rahmati1, Milad Azami, Ali Delpisheh, Mohammad Reza Hafezi Ahmadi, Kourosh Sayehmiri.
Abstract
Background: Controversial results have been reported concerning the influence of calcium intake on prostate cancer risk. The aim of this study was to determine any association between total calcium (in the diet and in supplements) intake and prostate cancer. Materials andEntities:
Keywords: Calcium; prostate cancer; systematic review; meta-analysis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29936714 PMCID: PMC6103569 DOI: 10.22034/APJCP.2018.19.6.1449
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Asian Pac J Cancer Prev ISSN: 1513-7368
Figure 1Entry Procedures of Studies to Meta-analysis
Characteristics of Studies Entered to Meta-Snalysis
| author -publication year-reference | continent | Design | (years) | Sample size | Age | Dietary assessment | PC stage or grade | Exposure | Quantity | RR (95% CI) | Adjustment for confounders |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Butler et al., 2010) | Asia | Cohort | 11 | 27293 | 45-75 | FFQ | -Total pc | Total calcium | 659 vs, 211mg/day | 1.25 (0.89-1.74) | Age, dialect group, interview year, education, weekly supplement use |
| (Ahn et al., 2007) | USA | Cohort | 8.9 | 29509 | 55-74 | FFQ | -Total pc | Total calcium | >2001vs, <750mg/day | -0.89 0.66-1.19) | Age, race, study center, FH–PC, BMI, smoking status, physical activity, diabetes history, red meat, total energy, education, no. of screening examinations during followup |
| (S.-Y. Park et al., 2007) | USA | Cohort | 6 | 293888 | 50-71 | Validated FFQ | Localized pc | Total calcium | >2000vs, <250mg/day | -0.93 (0.81-1.07) | Age, race/ ethnicity, education, marital status, BMI, vigorous physical activity, smoking, alcohol consumption, diabetes history, FH–PC, PSA screening, tomatoes, red meat, fish, vitamin E, ALA, total Energy…. |
| (Giovannucci, Liu, Platz, Stampfer, and Willett, 2007) | USA | Cohort | 16 | 47750 | 45-70 | Validated FFQ, 131 food items | -Total pc | Total calcium | >2000vs, 500-749mg.day | -1.28 (1.02-1.60) | Age, time period, BMI at age 21 y, vigorous physical activity, height, cigarette packyears in the previous 10 y, FH–PC, diabetes, total calories, red meat, fish, ALA, zinc supplements, tomato sauce |
| (Rohrmann et al., 2007) | USA | Cohort | 13 | 3892 | >35 | FFQ, 110 items | -Total pc | Total calcium | >957vs, <685 mg/day | 0.99 (0.70-1.41) | Age, energy intake, tomato products, BMI at age 21 y, SFA |
| (Rodriguez et al., 2003) | USA | Cohort | 7 | 65321 | 50-74 | Validated FFQ, 68 food items | Total pc Advance pc | Total calcium | >2000vs, <700 mg.day | 1.2 (1-1.6) 1.6 (0.9-3) | Age at entry, race, FH–PC, total energy, total fat intake, education, phosphorus, total vitamin D |
| (Wilson, Shui, Mucci, and Giovannucci, 2014) | USA | Cohort | 16 | 47885 | 49-75 | FFQs with more than 130 food items | Total pc | Total calcium | >2000 mg.day | 1.24 (1.02-1.51) | Age-BMI-race-smoking-diabetes-family history |
| (Rowland, Schwartz, John, and Ingles, 2012) | USA | Case-control | - | 783 | - | Total pc | Total calcium | >1059 mg.day | 2.20 (1.40-3.46) | - | |
| (Kesse et al., 2006) | Europe | cohort | 7.7 | 2776 | 45-60 | 5 3 24-h dietary Record | -total pc | Total calcium | >1081vs, <725 mg.day | -2.43 (1.05-5.62) | Age, energy intake, tomato products, BMI at age 21 y, SFA |
| (Y. Park et al., 2007) | USA | cohort | 8 | 82483 | 45-75 | Validated FFQ, $180 food items | -Total pc | Total calcium | >1301vs, <470 mg.day | 1.04 (0/91-1.20) | Age, time since cohort entry, ethnicity, FH– PC, education, BMI, smoking status, energy intake |
| (Qin, He, and Xu, 2009) | USA | cohort | 8 | 293907 | 50-71 | Validated FFQ | Total pc | Total calcium | 1530vs,526mg/day | 1.03 (0.98-1.08) | Age, raceethnicity, education, marital status, BMI, FH– cancer, diabetes, physical activity, ALA, alcohol, red meat, total energy, smoking, PSA test, tomatoes, selenium |
| (Kristal et al., 2010) | USA | Cohort | 7 | 9559 | >55 | FFQ | Total pc | Total calcium | >1357vs,<689mg/day | 1.17 (0.97-1.42 | Age, raceethnicity, treatment arm, BMI, energy intake |
Figure 2Forest Plot of Meta-analysis (A) and Sensitivity Analysis (B) for Relationship between Calcium Intake and Total Prostate Cancer
Figure 3Forest Plot of the Subgroup Analysis Based on Continent (A), the Continent (B), Dose of Consumable (C) for Relationship between Calcium Intake and Total Prostate Cancer
The Relationship between Calcium Intake and Total Prostate Cancer by Sample Size and Year of Publication
| Coefficient | Standard error | p | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Year of publication Cons | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.4 |
| -35.32 | 48.38 | 0.4 | |
| Sample size Cons | -7.64 | 7.44 | 0.3 |
| 0.22 | 0.08 | 0.3 |
Figure 4Forest Plot of the Relationship between Total Calcium and Localized Prostate Cancer
Figure 5Forest Plot of Subgroup Analysis Based on the Continent (A), the Continent (B), Dose of Consumable (C) for Relationship between Total Calcium and Localized Prostate Cancer
Figure 6Forest Plot of Publication Bias for Relationship between Calcium Intake and Total Prostate Cancer (A) and Relationship between Total Calcium and Localized Prostate Cancer (B)
Figure 7Forest Plot of the Relationship between Total Calcium and Advance Prostate Cancer
Figure 8Forest Plot of Subgroup Analysis Based on the Continent Follow-up Years for Relationship between Total Calcium and Advance Prostate Cancer