4.3 Article

Intakes of vitamins A, C, and E and use of multiple vitamin supplements and risk of colon cancer: a pooled analysis of prospective cohort studies

Journal

CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL
Volume 21, Issue 11, Pages 1745-1757

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10552-010-9549-y

Keywords

Vitamin A; Vitamin C; Vitamin E; Multivitamin; Colon cancer; Cohort study; Pooled analysis

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [CA55075]
  2. National Colorectal Cancer Research Alliance of the Entertainment Industry Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To evaluate the associations between intakes of vitamins A, C, and E and risk of colon cancer. Using the primary data from 13 cohort studies, we estimated study- and sex-specific relative risks (RR) with Cox proportional hazards models and subsequently pooled RRs using a random effects model. Among 676,141 men and women, 5,454 colon cancer cases were identified (7-20 years of follow-up across studies). Vitamin A, C, and E intakes from food only were not associated with colon cancer risk. For intakes from food and supplements (total), the pooled multivariate RRs (95% CI) were 0.88 (0.76-1.02, > 4,000 vs. a parts per thousand currency sign1,000 mu g/day) for vitamin A, 0.81 (0.71-0.92, > 600 vs. a parts per thousand currency sign100 mg/day) for vitamin C, and 0.78 (0.66-0.92, > 200 vs. a parts per thousand currency sign6 mg/day) for vitamin E. Adjustment for total folate intake attenuated these associations, but the inverse associations with vitamins C and E remained significant. Multivitamin use was significantly inversely associated with colon cancer risk (RR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.81-0.96). Modest inverse associations with vitamin C and E intakes may be due to high correlations with folate intake, which had a similar inverse association with colon cancer. An inverse association with multivitamin use, a major source of folate and other vitamins, deserves further study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available