Limits...
Folic acid supplements and colorectal cancer risk: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Qin T, Du M, Du H, Shu Y, Wang M, Zhu L - Sci Rep (2015)

Bottom Line: We herein performed a meta-analysis based on relevant studies to reach a more definitive conclusion.No significant heterogeneity or publication bias was observed.In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrated that folic acid supplementation had no effect on colorectal cancer risk.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.

ABSTRACT
Numerous studies have investigated the effects of folic acid supplementation on colorectal cancer risk, but conflicting results were reported. We herein performed a meta-analysis based on relevant studies to reach a more definitive conclusion. The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before October 2014. Eight articles met the inclusion criteria and were subsequently analyzed. The results suggested that folic acid treatment was not associated with colorectal cancer risk in the total population (relative risk [RR] = 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.82-1.22, P = 0.974). Moreover, no statistical effect was identified in further subgroup analyses stratified by ethnicity, gender, body mass index (BMI) and potential confounding factors. No significant heterogeneity or publication bias was observed. In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrated that folic acid supplementation had no effect on colorectal cancer risk. However, this finding must be validated by further large studies.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Forest plot of the association between colorectal cancer risk and folic acid supplementation.The squares and horizontal lines correspond to the study-specific RR and 95% CI, respectively. The areas of the squares reflect the weight. The diamond represents the summary RR and 95% CI.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4487230&req=5

f2: Forest plot of the association between colorectal cancer risk and folic acid supplementation.The squares and horizontal lines correspond to the study-specific RR and 95% CI, respectively. The areas of the squares reflect the weight. The diamond represents the summary RR and 95% CI.

Mentions: Our analysis revealed that supplementary folic acid lacked any association with the colorectal cancer incidence (relative risk [RR] = 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.82–1.22, P = 0.974; Fig. 2). A subgroup analysis based on ethnicity led to a similar conclusion (Caucasian RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.71–1.17, P = 0.463; mixed ethnicity RR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.85–1.67, P = 0.303). In further analyses stratified by age, gender, body mass index (BMI), dose of folic acid, duration of the study or putative confounding factors, no significant effect was observed (Table 2).


Folic acid supplements and colorectal cancer risk: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Qin T, Du M, Du H, Shu Y, Wang M, Zhu L - Sci Rep (2015)

Forest plot of the association between colorectal cancer risk and folic acid supplementation.The squares and horizontal lines correspond to the study-specific RR and 95% CI, respectively. The areas of the squares reflect the weight. The diamond represents the summary RR and 95% CI.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4487230&req=5

f2: Forest plot of the association between colorectal cancer risk and folic acid supplementation.The squares and horizontal lines correspond to the study-specific RR and 95% CI, respectively. The areas of the squares reflect the weight. The diamond represents the summary RR and 95% CI.
Mentions: Our analysis revealed that supplementary folic acid lacked any association with the colorectal cancer incidence (relative risk [RR] = 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.82–1.22, P = 0.974; Fig. 2). A subgroup analysis based on ethnicity led to a similar conclusion (Caucasian RR = 0.91, 95% CI = 0.71–1.17, P = 0.463; mixed ethnicity RR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.85–1.67, P = 0.303). In further analyses stratified by age, gender, body mass index (BMI), dose of folic acid, duration of the study or putative confounding factors, no significant effect was observed (Table 2).

Bottom Line: We herein performed a meta-analysis based on relevant studies to reach a more definitive conclusion.No significant heterogeneity or publication bias was observed.In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrated that folic acid supplementation had no effect on colorectal cancer risk.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, China.

ABSTRACT
Numerous studies have investigated the effects of folic acid supplementation on colorectal cancer risk, but conflicting results were reported. We herein performed a meta-analysis based on relevant studies to reach a more definitive conclusion. The PubMed and Embase databases were searched for quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published before October 2014. Eight articles met the inclusion criteria and were subsequently analyzed. The results suggested that folic acid treatment was not associated with colorectal cancer risk in the total population (relative risk [RR] = 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.82-1.22, P = 0.974). Moreover, no statistical effect was identified in further subgroup analyses stratified by ethnicity, gender, body mass index (BMI) and potential confounding factors. No significant heterogeneity or publication bias was observed. In conclusion, our meta-analysis demonstrated that folic acid supplementation had no effect on colorectal cancer risk. However, this finding must be validated by further large studies.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus