Limits...
Saturated, Monounsaturated and Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Intake and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer: Evidence from Observational Studies.

Yao X, Tian Z - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: Random- or fixed-effects models were used to estimate the relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).We found no evidence of publication bias.Further large prospective studies are warranted to report the results stratified by the subtypes of MUFA and PUFA and adjust for other potential risk factors to eliminate residual confounding.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of General Surgery, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, P. R. China.

ABSTRACT

Background: Although the relationship between dietary monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs), polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), and saturated fatty acids (SFAs) intake and pancreatic cancer risk has been reported by several studies, the evidence is controversial. We firstly conducted this comprehensive meta-analysis to summarize the aforementioned evidence from observational studies.

Methods: The MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and ISI Web of Science databases were used to search for epidemiological studies of dietary SFA, MUFA, and PUFA and pancreatic cancer risk that were published until the end of June 2014. Random- or fixed-effects models were used to estimate the relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also carried out subgroup, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses.

Results: We identified 13 case-control studies and 7 prospective studies which including 6270 pancreatic cancer cases in the meta-analysis of SFA, MUFA, and PUFA and risk of pancreatic cancer. The summary RR was 1.13 (95%CI = 0.94-1.35, I2 = 70.7%) for SFA, 1.00 (95%CI = 0.87-1.14, I2 = 43.4%) for MUFA, and 0.87 (95%CI = 0.75-1.00, I2 = 55.3%) for PUFA for high versus low intake categories. We found no evidence of publication bias.

Conclusion: In summary, findings of this study supports an inverse association between diets high in PUFA and pancreatic cancer risk. Further large prospective studies are warranted to report the results stratified by the subtypes of MUFA and PUFA and adjust for other potential risk factors to eliminate residual confounding.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Forest plots (random effect model) of meta-analysis on the relationship between monounsaturated fatty acids intake and pancreatic cancer risk.Squares indicate study-specific relative risks (size of the square reflects the study-specific statistical weight); horizontal lines indicate 95% CIs; diamond indicates the summary relative risk estimate with its 95% CI. M: male; F: female; RR: relative risk.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4481405&req=5

pone.0130870.g003: Forest plots (random effect model) of meta-analysis on the relationship between monounsaturated fatty acids intake and pancreatic cancer risk.Squares indicate study-specific relative risks (size of the square reflects the study-specific statistical weight); horizontal lines indicate 95% CIs; diamond indicates the summary relative risk estimate with its 95% CI. M: male; F: female; RR: relative risk.

Mentions: Seventeen studies [12,15,17,19–24,26–27,29–34] demonstrated results for high versus low intake of MUFA and risk of pancreatic cancer. A random-effects model yielded a summary RR of 1.00 (95%CI = 0.87–1.14), with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 43.4%, P = 0.026; Table 1, Fig 3, S2 Fig). We found no evidence of publication bias by the Egger’s (P = 0.278) and Begg’s method (P = 0.449) as well as in funnel plots when inspected visually. The RRs ranged from 0.97 (95%CI = 0.84–1.12, I2 = 36.4%) when ruling out the study by Nkondjock et al [15] to 1.03 (95%CI = 0.90–1.18, I2 = 34.7%) when ruling out the study by Thiebaut et al [22] in the sensitivity analysis.


Saturated, Monounsaturated and Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids Intake and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer: Evidence from Observational Studies.

Yao X, Tian Z - PLoS ONE (2015)

Forest plots (random effect model) of meta-analysis on the relationship between monounsaturated fatty acids intake and pancreatic cancer risk.Squares indicate study-specific relative risks (size of the square reflects the study-specific statistical weight); horizontal lines indicate 95% CIs; diamond indicates the summary relative risk estimate with its 95% CI. M: male; F: female; RR: relative risk.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4481405&req=5

pone.0130870.g003: Forest plots (random effect model) of meta-analysis on the relationship between monounsaturated fatty acids intake and pancreatic cancer risk.Squares indicate study-specific relative risks (size of the square reflects the study-specific statistical weight); horizontal lines indicate 95% CIs; diamond indicates the summary relative risk estimate with its 95% CI. M: male; F: female; RR: relative risk.
Mentions: Seventeen studies [12,15,17,19–24,26–27,29–34] demonstrated results for high versus low intake of MUFA and risk of pancreatic cancer. A random-effects model yielded a summary RR of 1.00 (95%CI = 0.87–1.14), with moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 43.4%, P = 0.026; Table 1, Fig 3, S2 Fig). We found no evidence of publication bias by the Egger’s (P = 0.278) and Begg’s method (P = 0.449) as well as in funnel plots when inspected visually. The RRs ranged from 0.97 (95%CI = 0.84–1.12, I2 = 36.4%) when ruling out the study by Nkondjock et al [15] to 1.03 (95%CI = 0.90–1.18, I2 = 34.7%) when ruling out the study by Thiebaut et al [22] in the sensitivity analysis.

Bottom Line: Random- or fixed-effects models were used to estimate the relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).We found no evidence of publication bias.Further large prospective studies are warranted to report the results stratified by the subtypes of MUFA and PUFA and adjust for other potential risk factors to eliminate residual confounding.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of General Surgery, Shengjing Hospital, China Medical University, Shenyang, P. R. China.

ABSTRACT

Background: Although the relationship between dietary monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs), polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), and saturated fatty acids (SFAs) intake and pancreatic cancer risk has been reported by several studies, the evidence is controversial. We firstly conducted this comprehensive meta-analysis to summarize the aforementioned evidence from observational studies.

Methods: The MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, and ISI Web of Science databases were used to search for epidemiological studies of dietary SFA, MUFA, and PUFA and pancreatic cancer risk that were published until the end of June 2014. Random- or fixed-effects models were used to estimate the relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We also carried out subgroup, sensitivity, and publication bias analyses.

Results: We identified 13 case-control studies and 7 prospective studies which including 6270 pancreatic cancer cases in the meta-analysis of SFA, MUFA, and PUFA and risk of pancreatic cancer. The summary RR was 1.13 (95%CI = 0.94-1.35, I2 = 70.7%) for SFA, 1.00 (95%CI = 0.87-1.14, I2 = 43.4%) for MUFA, and 0.87 (95%CI = 0.75-1.00, I2 = 55.3%) for PUFA for high versus low intake categories. We found no evidence of publication bias.

Conclusion: In summary, findings of this study supports an inverse association between diets high in PUFA and pancreatic cancer risk. Further large prospective studies are warranted to report the results stratified by the subtypes of MUFA and PUFA and adjust for other potential risk factors to eliminate residual confounding.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus