Literature DB >> 34918023

Body Composition and Prostate Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies.

Sarah A Purcell1,2, Camila L P Oliveira1, Michelle Mackenzie1, Paula Robson3, John D Lewis4, Carla M Prado1.   

Abstract

Body composition parameters are not captured by measures of body mass, which may explain inconsistent associations between body weight and prostate cancer (PC) risk. The objective of this systematic review was to characterize the association between fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) parameters and PC risk. A search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science identified case-control and cohort studies that measured body composition in relation to PC risk. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Thirteen observational studies were included, of which 8 were case-control studies (n = 1572 cases, n = 1937 controls) and 5 were prospective cohort studies (n = 7854 incident cases with PC). The NOS score was 5.9 ± 1.1 for case-control studies and 8.4 ± 1.3 for cohort studies. The most common body composition technique was bioelectrical impedance analysis (n = 9 studies), followed by DXA (n = 2), computed tomography (n = 2), air displacement plethysmography (n = 1), and MRI (n = 1). No case-control studies reported differences in %FM between PC cases and controls and no consistent differences in FM or FFM (in kilograms) were observed. Two out of 5 cohort studies reported that higher %FM was associated with lower PC risk. Conversely, 3 cohort studies reported a greater risk of being diagnosed with advanced/aggressive PC with higher FM (expressed in kilograms, %FM, or fat distribution). Two out of 4 studies (both case-control and cohort) found that higher abdominal adipose tissue was associated with increased PC risk. In conclusion, although results were inconsistent, there is some evidence that FM may be negatively associated with total PC risk but positively associated with the risk of advanced/aggressive PC; modest evidence suggests that abdominal adipose tissue may increase the risk of PC. Future work should elucidate unique patterns of FM distribution and PC risk to triage men at risk for developing PC. This study protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database as CRD42019133388.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Society for Nutrition.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adiposity; cancer; carcinoma; muscle; nutrition assessment; obesity

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 34918023      PMCID: PMC9340980          DOI: 10.1093/advances/nmab153

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Adv Nutr        ISSN: 2161-8313            Impact factor:   11.567


  66 in total

1.  Anthropometry and prostate cancer risk: a prospective study of 22,248 Norwegian men.

Authors:  T I Nilsen; L J Vatten
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  1999-08       Impact factor: 2.506

2.  Is Body Mass Index the Best Adiposity Measure for Prostate Cancer Risk? Results From a Veterans Affairs Biopsy Cohort.

Authors:  Lourdes Guerrios-Rivera; Lauren Howard; Jennifer Frank; Amanda De Hoedt; Devon Beverly; Delores J Grant; Cathrine Hoyo; Stephen J Freedland
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2017-04-10       Impact factor: 2.649

3.  Association of Anthropometric Measures with Prostate Cancer among African American Men in the NCI-Maryland Prostate Cancer Case-Control Study.

Authors:  Margaret S Pichardo; Cheryl J Smith; Tiffany H Dorsey; Christopher A Loffredo; Stefan Ambs
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2018-05-21       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Visceral fat accumulation as a risk factor for prostate cancer.

Authors:  Pedro von Hafe; Francisco Pina; Ana Pérez; Margarida Tavares; Henrique Barros
Journal:  Obes Res       Date:  2004-12

5.  Analysis of energy utilization and body composition in kidney, bladder, and adrenal cancer patients.

Authors:  Wen P Xu; Dong X Cao; Zong M Lin; Guo H Wu; Lian Chen; Jian P Zhang; Bo Zhang; Zi A Yang; Yi Jiang; Yu S Han; Le Xu; Yu Zhu; Wen F Chen
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2010-10-02       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 6.  Sarcopenia and cachexia in the era of obesity: clinical and nutritional impact.

Authors:  C M Prado; S J Cushen; C E Orsso; A M Ryan
Journal:  Proc Nutr Soc       Date:  2016-01-08       Impact factor: 6.297

7.  Body composition indices of a load-capacity model: gender- and BMI-specific reference curves.

Authors:  Mario Siervo; Carla M Prado; Emily Mire; Stephanie Broyles; Jonathan C K Wells; Steven Heymsfield; Peter T Katzmarzyk
Journal:  Public Health Nutr       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 4.022

8.  Obesity, body composition, and prostate cancer.

Authors:  Jay H Fowke; Saundra S Motley; Raoul S Concepcion; David F Penson; Daniel A Barocas
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2012-01-18       Impact factor: 4.430

9.  Prospective investigation of risk factors for prostate cancer in the UK Biobank cohort study.

Authors:  Aurora Perez-Cornago; Timothy J Key; Naomi E Allen; Georgina K Fensom; Kathryn E Bradbury; Richard M Martin; Ruth C Travis
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2017-09-14       Impact factor: 7.640

10.  Body size and composition and risk of site-specific cancers in the UK Biobank and large international consortia: A mendelian randomisation study.

Authors:  Mathew Vithayathil; Paul Carter; Siddhartha Kar; Amy M Mason; Stephen Burgess; Susanna C Larsson
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2021-07-29       Impact factor: 11.613

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  Metformin: A promising drug for human cancers.

Authors:  Hongnian Wu; Dan Huang; Hong Zhou; Xueqin Sima; Zhe Wu; Yanling Sun; Long Wang; Ying Ruan; Qian Wu; Feng Wu; Tonghui She; Ying Chu; Qizhi Huang; Zhifeng Ning; Hao Zhang
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 3.111

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.