4.2 Article

Dietary and serum vitamins A and E and colorectal cancer risk in Chinese population: a case-control study

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER PREVENTION
卷 28, 期 4, 页码 268-277

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000452

关键词

colorectal cancer; serum alpha-tocopherols; serum retinol; vitamin A; vitamin E

类别

资金

  1. Guangdong Natural Science Foundation [2016A030313225, 2014A030313188]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effect of vitamin A (VA) and vitamin E (VE) on colorectal cancer (CRC) risk is controversial. The aim of this study is to examine the association between serum concentrations and dietary intakes of VA and VE and the risk of CRC in Guangdong, China. A total of 535 cases and 552 sex and age-matched (5-year interval) controls were recruited during July 2010 to September 2014. Dietary information was assessed by face-to-face interviews using a validated food frequency questionnaire. Concentrations of VA and VE were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence interval (CI) after adjusting for various potential confounders. A higher intake of VA and VE was found to be associated with 52 and 43% reduction in CRC risk. The ORs of the highest quartile compared with the lowest quartile intake were 0.48 (95% CI: 0.31, 0.73, P-trend<0.01) for VA and 0.57 (95% CI: 0.37, 0.88, P-trend<0.01) for VE. An inverse association was also found between serum retinol and CRC risk, with an adjusted OR (95% CI) of 0.28 (0.19-0.43) (P-trend<0.01). However, no statistically significant association was found between serum alpha-tocopherol and CRC risk. Stratified analysis by sex showed that serum retinol and dietary VA and VE were inversely associated with CRC risk in both sexes. This study supported the hypothesis that lower serum levels of retinol and lower intakes of VA and VE were associated with the risk of CRC in a Chinese population.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据