Body mass index and incidence of localized and advanced prostate cancer-a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies

Nutritional Epidemiology Unit, Division of Epidemiology, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Annals of Oncology (Impact Factor: 6.58). 01/2012; 23(7):1665-71. DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdr603
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The relationship between obesity and risk of prostate cancer (PCa) is unclear; however, etiologic heterogeneity by subtype of PCa (localized, advanced) related to obesity was suggested. Therefore, we conducted a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective studies to assess the association between body mass index (BMI) and risk of localized and advanced PCa.
Relevant prospective studies were identified by a search of Medline and Embase databases to 03 October 2011. Twelve studies on localized PCa (1,033,009 men, 19,130 cases) and 13 on advanced PCa (1,080,790 men, 7067 cases) were identified. We carried out a dose-response meta-analysis using random-effects model.
For localized PCa, we observed an inverse linear relationship with BMI [Ptrend<0.001, relative risk (RR): 0.94 (95% confidence interval, 95% CI, 0.91-0.97) for every 5 kg/m2 increase]; there was no evidence of heterogeneity (Pheterogeneity=0.27). For advanced PCa, we observed a linear direct relationship with BMI (Ptrend=0.001, RR: 1.09 (95% CI 1.02-1.16) for every 5 kg/m2 increase); there was weak evidence of heterogeneity (Pheterogeneity=0.08). Omitting one study that contributed substantially to the heterogeneity yielded a pooled RR of 1.07 (95% CI 1.01-1.13) for every 5 kg/m2 increase (Pheterogeneity=0.26).
The quantitative summary of the accumulated evidence indicates that obesity may have a dual effect on PCa-a decreased risk for localized PCa and an increased risk for advanced PCa.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Epidemiological studies have suggested inconsistent associations between omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n-3 PUFAs) and prostate cancer (PCa) risk. We performed a dose-response meta-analysis of prospective observational studies investigating both dietary intake and circulating n-3 PUFAs and PCa risk. PubMed and EMBASE prior to February 2014 were searched, and 16 publications were eligible. Blood concentration of docosahexaenoic acid, but not alpha-linolenic acid or eicosapentaenoic acid, showed marginal positive association with PCa risk (relative risk for 1% increase in blood docosahexaenoic acid concentration: 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.05; I(2) = 26%; P = 0.05 for linear trend), while dietary docosahexaenoic acid intake showed a non-linear positive association with PCa risk (P < 0.01). Dietary alpha-linolenic acid was inversely associated with PCa risk (relative risk for 0.5 g/day increase in alpha-linolenic acid intake: 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-1.00; I(2) = 0%; P = 0.04 for linear trend), which was dominated by a single study. Subgroup analyses indicated that blood eicosapentaenoic acid concentration and blood docosahexaenoic acid concentration were positively associated with aggressive PCa risk and nonaggressive PCa risk, respectively. Among studies with nested case-control study designs, a 0.2% increase in blood docosapentaenoic acid concentration was associated with a 3% reduced risk of PCa (relative risk 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.94-1.00; I(2) = 44%; P = 0.05 for linear trend). In conclusion, different individual n-3 PUFA exposures may exhibit different or even opposite associations with PCa risk, and more prospective studies, especially those examining dietary n-3 PUFAs and PCa risk stratified by severity of cancer, are needed to confirm the results.
    Journal of Epidemiology 03/2015; 25(4). DOI:10.2188/jea.JE20140120 · 2.86 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A number of epidemiological studies have suggested that obesity is associated, albeit inconsistently, with the incidence of prostate cancer (PCa). In order to provide a quantitative assessment of this association, the present study examined the correlation between obesity and the incidence and associated mortalities of PCa in an updated meta-analysis of cohort studies. The cohort studies were identified by searching the EMBASE and MEDLINE databases on January 1, 2014. The summary relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects models. In total, 17 studies, which included 3,569,926 individuals overall, were selected according to predefined inclusion criteria. Based upon the results of the random-effects models, obesity was not significantly correlated with the incidence of PCa (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.95-1.06). However, further analysis revealed that obesity was significantly correlated with an increased risk of aggressive PCa (RR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.04-1.25). Furthermore, an increased risk of PCa-associated mortality was significantly associated with obesity (RR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.15-2.33), without any heterogeneity between the studies (I(2)=0.0%; P=0.847). The present study provides preliminary evidence to demonstrate that obesity is a significant risk factor for aggressive PCa and PCa-specific mortality. The low survival rates observed among obese males with PCa may be a likely explanation for this association.
    Oncology letters 03/2015; 9(3):1307-1312. DOI:10.3892/ol.2014.2841 · 0.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The incidence and prevalence of obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus continues to rise worldwide, and there is evidence which suggests that both increased body mass index (i.e., obesity) and type 2 diabetes mellitus act as independent and synergistic risk factors for the development, mortality risk, and survival of certain cancers, and thereby contribute to the increasing incidence of cancers worldwide. Numerous pathways are hypothesised to account for the independent and combined effects of obesity and diabetes on cancer predisposition and outcomes. In understanding the individual and combined effects of obesity and diabetes on cancer predisposition and survival, there are confounding factors, such as medications, biases, and weight loss, to consider.
    03/2015; 4(1). DOI:10.1007/s13668-014-0105-3