Cargando…
Type 2 diabetes mellitus and risk of colorectal adenoma: a meta-analysis of observational studies
BACKGROUND: To summarize the relationship between type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and risk of colorectal adenomas (CRA), we performed a meta-analysis of observational studies. METHODS: To find studies, we searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and conference abstracts and rela...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4989384/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27535548 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-2685-3 |
Sumario: | BACKGROUND: To summarize the relationship between type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and risk of colorectal adenomas (CRA), we performed a meta-analysis of observational studies. METHODS: To find studies, we searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and conference abstracts and related publications for American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology. Studies that reported relative risks (RRs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between T2DM and risk of CRA were included. The meta-analysis assessed the relationships between T2DM and risk of CRA. Sensitivity analyses were performed in two ways: (1) by omitting each study iteratively and (2) by keeping high-quality studies only. Publication bias was detected by Egger’s and Begg’s tests and corrected using the trim and fill method. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 17 studies with 28,999 participants and 6798 CRA cases. We found that T2DM was a risk factor for CRA (RR: 1.52; 95 % CI: 1.29–1.80), and also for the advanced adenoma (RR: 1.41; 95 % CI: 1.06–1.87). Patients with existing T2DM (RR: 1.56; 95 % CI: 1.16–2.08) or newly diagnosed T2DM (RR: 1.51; 95 % CI: 1.16–1.97) have a risk of CRA. Similar significant results were found in retrospective studies (RR: 1.57; 95 % CI: 1.30–1.89) and population based cross-sectional studies (RR: 1.46; 95 % CI: 1.21–1.89), but not in prospective studies (RR: 1.27; 95 % CI: 0.77–2.10). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggested that T2DM plays a risk role in the risk of developing CRA. Consequently, medical workers should increase the rate of CRA screening for T2DM patients so that they can benefit from behavioural interventions that can help prevent the development of colorectal cancer. Additional, large prospective cohort studies are needed to make a more convincing case for these associations. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2685-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
---|