Cargando…
Diet Quality and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers Risk: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Assessment of Evidence Quality
We aimed to assess the effect of a high-quality diet on the risk of upper gastrointestinal cancer and to evaluate the overall quality of our findings by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and the references of related articles to February 2020. Two reviewers independently retrieved...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7353231/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32585822 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu12061863 |
_version_ | 1783557827686563840 |
---|---|
author | Moazzen, Sara van der Sloot, Kimberley W. J. Vonk, Roel J. de Bock, Geertruida H. Alizadeh, Behrooz Z. |
author_facet | Moazzen, Sara van der Sloot, Kimberley W. J. Vonk, Roel J. de Bock, Geertruida H. Alizadeh, Behrooz Z. |
author_sort | Moazzen, Sara |
collection | PubMed |
description | We aimed to assess the effect of a high-quality diet on the risk of upper gastrointestinal cancer and to evaluate the overall quality of our findings by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and the references of related articles to February 2020. Two reviewers independently retrieved the data and performed the quality assessments. We defined the highest-quality diet as that with the lowest Diet Inflammatory Index category and the highest Mediterranean Diet Score category. Overall odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for upper gastrointestinal cancer risk comparing the highest- versus lowest-diet quality. A random-effects meta-analysis was then applied with Review Manager, and the quality of the overall findings was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The highest-quality diets were significantly associated with reduced risk of upper gastrointestinal cancers, achieving odds ratios of 0.59 (95% confidence interval: 0.48–0.72) for the Diet Inflammatory Index, pooling the findings from nine studies, and 0.72 (95% confidence interval: 0.61–0.88) for the Mediterranean Diet Score, pooling the findings from 11 studies. We observed a minimum of 69% heterogeneity in the pooled results. The pooled results were graded as low quality of evidence. Although it may be possible to offer evidence-based general dietary advice for the prevention of upper gastrointestinal cancers, the evidence is currently of insufficient quality to develop dietary recommendations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7353231 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73532312020-07-15 Diet Quality and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers Risk: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Assessment of Evidence Quality Moazzen, Sara van der Sloot, Kimberley W. J. Vonk, Roel J. de Bock, Geertruida H. Alizadeh, Behrooz Z. Nutrients Review We aimed to assess the effect of a high-quality diet on the risk of upper gastrointestinal cancer and to evaluate the overall quality of our findings by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane, and the references of related articles to February 2020. Two reviewers independently retrieved the data and performed the quality assessments. We defined the highest-quality diet as that with the lowest Diet Inflammatory Index category and the highest Mediterranean Diet Score category. Overall odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated for upper gastrointestinal cancer risk comparing the highest- versus lowest-diet quality. A random-effects meta-analysis was then applied with Review Manager, and the quality of the overall findings was evaluated with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The highest-quality diets were significantly associated with reduced risk of upper gastrointestinal cancers, achieving odds ratios of 0.59 (95% confidence interval: 0.48–0.72) for the Diet Inflammatory Index, pooling the findings from nine studies, and 0.72 (95% confidence interval: 0.61–0.88) for the Mediterranean Diet Score, pooling the findings from 11 studies. We observed a minimum of 69% heterogeneity in the pooled results. The pooled results were graded as low quality of evidence. Although it may be possible to offer evidence-based general dietary advice for the prevention of upper gastrointestinal cancers, the evidence is currently of insufficient quality to develop dietary recommendations. MDPI 2020-06-23 /pmc/articles/PMC7353231/ /pubmed/32585822 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu12061863 Text en © 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review Moazzen, Sara van der Sloot, Kimberley W. J. Vonk, Roel J. de Bock, Geertruida H. Alizadeh, Behrooz Z. Diet Quality and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers Risk: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Assessment of Evidence Quality |
title | Diet Quality and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers Risk: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Assessment of Evidence Quality |
title_full | Diet Quality and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers Risk: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Assessment of Evidence Quality |
title_fullStr | Diet Quality and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers Risk: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Assessment of Evidence Quality |
title_full_unstemmed | Diet Quality and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers Risk: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Assessment of Evidence Quality |
title_short | Diet Quality and Upper Gastrointestinal Cancers Risk: A Meta-Analysis and Critical Assessment of Evidence Quality |
title_sort | diet quality and upper gastrointestinal cancers risk: a meta-analysis and critical assessment of evidence quality |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7353231/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32585822 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/nu12061863 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT moazzensara dietqualityanduppergastrointestinalcancersriskametaanalysisandcriticalassessmentofevidencequality AT vanderslootkimberleywj dietqualityanduppergastrointestinalcancersriskametaanalysisandcriticalassessmentofevidencequality AT vonkroelj dietqualityanduppergastrointestinalcancersriskametaanalysisandcriticalassessmentofevidencequality AT debockgeertruidah dietqualityanduppergastrointestinalcancersriskametaanalysisandcriticalassessmentofevidencequality AT alizadehbehroozz dietqualityanduppergastrointestinalcancersriskametaanalysisandcriticalassessmentofevidencequality |