Hongzhen Du1,2, Tianfeng Zhang1,2, Xuning Lu1,2, Meicui Chen1,2, Xiaoling Li1,2, Zengning Li1,2. 1. Department of Nutrition, The First Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei, China. 2. Key Laboratory of Nutrition and Health of Hebei Province, Shijiazhuang, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Glycemic index (GI) or glycemic load (GL) has been investigated in the field of cancer research for several years. However, the relationship between GI or GL and lung cancer risk remains inconsistent. Therefore, this study aimed to summarize previous findings on this relationship. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science databases, and Cochrane Library were searched by July 2021. This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A fixed or random-effects model was adopted for meta-analysis to compute the pooled relative risks (RR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and publication bias analyses were also performed. RESULTS: In total, nine articles were included, with four case-control studies and five cohort studies, including 17,019 cases and 786,479 controls. After merging the studies, pooled multivariable RRs of lung cancer based on the highest versus the lowest intake were 1.14 (95%CI: 1.03-1.26) and 0.93 (95%CI: 0.84-1.02) for GI and GL. Results persisted in most stratifications after stratifying by potential confounders in the relationship between GI and lung cancer risk. There was a non-linear dose response relation for GI with lung caner risk. CONCLUSION: GI typically has a positive relationship with lung cancer risk. However, no associations between GL and lung cancer risk were observed based on current evidence, suggesting that this issue should be studied and verified further to substantiate these findings.
OBJECTIVE: Glycemic index (GI) or glycemic load (GL) has been investigated in the field of cancer research for several years. However, the relationship between GI or GL and lung cancer risk remains inconsistent. Therefore, this study aimed to summarize previous findings on this relationship. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science databases, and Cochrane Library were searched by July 2021. This review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. A fixed or random-effects model was adopted for meta-analysis to compute the pooled relative risks (RR) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses, and publication bias analyses were also performed. RESULTS: In total, nine articles were included, with four case-control studies and five cohort studies, including 17,019 cases and 786,479 controls. After merging the studies, pooled multivariable RRs of lung cancer based on the highest versus the lowest intake were 1.14 (95%CI: 1.03-1.26) and 0.93 (95%CI: 0.84-1.02) for GI and GL. Results persisted in most stratifications after stratifying by potential confounders in the relationship between GI and lung cancer risk. There was a non-linear dose response relation for GI with lung caner risk. CONCLUSION: GI typically has a positive relationship with lung cancer risk. However, no associations between GL and lung cancer risk were observed based on current evidence, suggesting that this issue should be studied and verified further to substantiate these findings.
Authors: Sabrina Schlesinger; Doris S M Chan; Snieguole Vingeliene; Ana R Vieira; Leila Abar; Elli Polemiti; Christophe A T Stevens; Darren C Greenwood; Dagfinn Aune; Teresa Norat Journal: Nutr Rev Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 7.110