Cargando…

The Protective Effect of Dietary Phytosterols on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: Many studies have explored the association between dietary phytosterols and cancer risk, but the results have been inconsistent. We aimed to provide a synopsis of the current understanding of phytosterol intake for cancer risk through a systematic evaluation of the results from pre...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jiang, Lu, Zhao, Xin, Xu, Jun, Li, Chujun, Yu, Yue, Wang, Wei, Zhu, Lingjun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6612402/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31341477
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/7479518
_version_ 1783432879656665088
author Jiang, Lu
Zhao, Xin
Xu, Jun
Li, Chujun
Yu, Yue
Wang, Wei
Zhu, Lingjun
author_facet Jiang, Lu
Zhao, Xin
Xu, Jun
Li, Chujun
Yu, Yue
Wang, Wei
Zhu, Lingjun
author_sort Jiang, Lu
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: Many studies have explored the association between dietary phytosterols and cancer risk, but the results have been inconsistent. We aimed to provide a synopsis of the current understanding of phytosterol intake for cancer risk through a systematic evaluation of the results from previous studies. METHODS: We performed a literature search of PUBMED, EMBASE, CNKI, and Wanfang, and studies published before May 2019 focusing on dietary total phytosterols, β-sitosterol, campesterol, stigmasterol, β-sitostanol, and campestanol, as well as their relationships with cancer risk, were included in this meta-analysis. Summaries of the relative risks from 11 case-control and case-cohort studies were eventually estimated by randomized or fixed effects models. RESULTS: The summary relative risk for the highest versus the lowest intake was 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49–0.81) for total phytosterols, 0.74 (95% CI = 0.54–1.02) for β-sitosterol, 0.72 (95% CI = 0.51–1.00) for campesterol, 0.83 (95% CI = 0.60–1.16) for stigmasterol, 1.12 (95% CI = 0.96–1.32) for β-sitostanol, and 0.77 (95% CI = 0.65–0.90) for campestanol. In a dose-response analysis, the results suggested a linear association for campesterol and a nonlinear association for total phytosterol intake. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the hypothesis that high phytosterol intake is inversely related to risk of cancer. Further studies with prospective designs that control for vital confounders and investigate the important anticancer effects of dietary phytosterols are warranted.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6612402
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-66124022019-07-24 The Protective Effect of Dietary Phytosterols on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Meta-Analysis Jiang, Lu Zhao, Xin Xu, Jun Li, Chujun Yu, Yue Wang, Wei Zhu, Lingjun J Oncol Review Article BACKGROUNDS/AIMS: Many studies have explored the association between dietary phytosterols and cancer risk, but the results have been inconsistent. We aimed to provide a synopsis of the current understanding of phytosterol intake for cancer risk through a systematic evaluation of the results from previous studies. METHODS: We performed a literature search of PUBMED, EMBASE, CNKI, and Wanfang, and studies published before May 2019 focusing on dietary total phytosterols, β-sitosterol, campesterol, stigmasterol, β-sitostanol, and campestanol, as well as their relationships with cancer risk, were included in this meta-analysis. Summaries of the relative risks from 11 case-control and case-cohort studies were eventually estimated by randomized or fixed effects models. RESULTS: The summary relative risk for the highest versus the lowest intake was 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.49–0.81) for total phytosterols, 0.74 (95% CI = 0.54–1.02) for β-sitosterol, 0.72 (95% CI = 0.51–1.00) for campesterol, 0.83 (95% CI = 0.60–1.16) for stigmasterol, 1.12 (95% CI = 0.96–1.32) for β-sitostanol, and 0.77 (95% CI = 0.65–0.90) for campestanol. In a dose-response analysis, the results suggested a linear association for campesterol and a nonlinear association for total phytosterol intake. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the hypothesis that high phytosterol intake is inversely related to risk of cancer. Further studies with prospective designs that control for vital confounders and investigate the important anticancer effects of dietary phytosterols are warranted. Hindawi 2019-06-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6612402/ /pubmed/31341477 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/7479518 Text en Copyright © 2019 Lu Jiang et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Review Article
Jiang, Lu
Zhao, Xin
Xu, Jun
Li, Chujun
Yu, Yue
Wang, Wei
Zhu, Lingjun
The Protective Effect of Dietary Phytosterols on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Meta-Analysis
title The Protective Effect of Dietary Phytosterols on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Meta-Analysis
title_full The Protective Effect of Dietary Phytosterols on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr The Protective Effect of Dietary Phytosterols on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed The Protective Effect of Dietary Phytosterols on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Meta-Analysis
title_short The Protective Effect of Dietary Phytosterols on Cancer Risk: A Systematic Meta-Analysis
title_sort protective effect of dietary phytosterols on cancer risk: a systematic meta-analysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6612402/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31341477
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2019/7479518
work_keys_str_mv AT jianglu theprotectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT zhaoxin theprotectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT xujun theprotectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT lichujun theprotectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT yuyue theprotectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT wangwei theprotectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT zhulingjun theprotectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT jianglu protectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT zhaoxin protectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT xujun protectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT lichujun protectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT yuyue protectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT wangwei protectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis
AT zhulingjun protectiveeffectofdietaryphytosterolsoncancerriskasystematicmetaanalysis