Cargando…

Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta‐Analyses

The relationship between vitamin D status or supplementation and cancer outcomes has been examined in several meta‐analyses. To address remaining knowledge gaps, we conducted a systematic overview and critical appraisal of pertinent meta‐analyses. For meta‐analyses of trials, we assessed their quali...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Sluyter, John D, Manson, JoAnn E, Scragg, Robert
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7839823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33553987
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbm4.10420
_version_ 1783643464677720064
author Sluyter, John D
Manson, JoAnn E
Scragg, Robert
author_facet Sluyter, John D
Manson, JoAnn E
Scragg, Robert
author_sort Sluyter, John D
collection PubMed
description The relationship between vitamin D status or supplementation and cancer outcomes has been examined in several meta‐analyses. To address remaining knowledge gaps, we conducted a systematic overview and critical appraisal of pertinent meta‐analyses. For meta‐analyses of trials, we assessed their quality using AMSTAR‐2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews), strength of associations using umbrella review methodology and credibility of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria. Meta‐analyses of observational studies reported inverse associations of 25OHD with risk of cancer incidence and cancer mortality and, particularly for colorectal cancer, fulfilled some of Bradford‐Hill's causation criteria. In meta‐analyses of trials, vitamin D supplementation did not affect cancer incidence. However, we found credible evidence that vitamin D supplementation reduced total cancer mortality risk, with five out of six meta‐analyses reporting a relative risk (RR) reduction of up to 16%: RR, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.74–0.95). The strength of the association, however, was classified as weak. This was true among meta‐analyses of high, moderate, and lower quality (AMSTAR‐2–rated). Trials did not include large numbers of vitamin D‐deficient participants; many tested relatively low doses and lacked sufficiently powered data on site‐specific cancers. In conclusion, meta‐analyses show that, although observational evidence indicates that low vitamin D status is associated with a higher risk of cancer outcomes, randomized trials show that vitamin D supplementation reduces total cancer mortality, but not cancer incidence. However, trials with larger proportions of vitamin D‐insufficient participants and longer durations of follow‐up, plus adequately powered data on site‐specific common cancers, would provide further insight into the evidence base. © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7839823
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78398232021-02-04 Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta‐Analyses Sluyter, John D Manson, JoAnn E Scragg, Robert JBMR Plus Special Issue The relationship between vitamin D status or supplementation and cancer outcomes has been examined in several meta‐analyses. To address remaining knowledge gaps, we conducted a systematic overview and critical appraisal of pertinent meta‐analyses. For meta‐analyses of trials, we assessed their quality using AMSTAR‐2 (A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews), strength of associations using umbrella review methodology and credibility of evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) criteria. Meta‐analyses of observational studies reported inverse associations of 25OHD with risk of cancer incidence and cancer mortality and, particularly for colorectal cancer, fulfilled some of Bradford‐Hill's causation criteria. In meta‐analyses of trials, vitamin D supplementation did not affect cancer incidence. However, we found credible evidence that vitamin D supplementation reduced total cancer mortality risk, with five out of six meta‐analyses reporting a relative risk (RR) reduction of up to 16%: RR, 0.84 (95% CI, 0.74–0.95). The strength of the association, however, was classified as weak. This was true among meta‐analyses of high, moderate, and lower quality (AMSTAR‐2–rated). Trials did not include large numbers of vitamin D‐deficient participants; many tested relatively low doses and lacked sufficiently powered data on site‐specific cancers. In conclusion, meta‐analyses show that, although observational evidence indicates that low vitamin D status is associated with a higher risk of cancer outcomes, randomized trials show that vitamin D supplementation reduces total cancer mortality, but not cancer incidence. However, trials with larger proportions of vitamin D‐insufficient participants and longer durations of follow‐up, plus adequately powered data on site‐specific common cancers, would provide further insight into the evidence base. © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 2020-11-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7839823/ /pubmed/33553987 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbm4.10420 Text en © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Special Issue
Sluyter, John D
Manson, JoAnn E
Scragg, Robert
Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta‐Analyses
title Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta‐Analyses
title_full Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta‐Analyses
title_fullStr Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta‐Analyses
title_full_unstemmed Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta‐Analyses
title_short Vitamin D and Clinical Cancer Outcomes: A Review of Meta‐Analyses
title_sort vitamin d and clinical cancer outcomes: a review of meta‐analyses
topic Special Issue
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7839823/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33553987
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbm4.10420
work_keys_str_mv AT sluyterjohnd vitamindandclinicalcanceroutcomesareviewofmetaanalyses
AT mansonjoanne vitamindandclinicalcanceroutcomesareviewofmetaanalyses
AT scraggrobert vitamindandclinicalcanceroutcomesareviewofmetaanalyses