4.6 Article

Diabetes mellitus and incidence and mortality of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 26, 期 11, 页码 863-876

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10654-011-9617-y

关键词

Colorectal cancer; Diabetes mellitus; Systematic review; Meta-analysis; Incidence; Mortality

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30972937, 81072025]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Increasing evidence suggests that a history of diabetes mellitus (DM) may be associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). To provide a quantitative assessment of the association between DM and risk of CRC, We evaluated the relation between DM and incidence and mortality of CRC in a systematic review of cohort studies. Full publications of cohort studies were identified in MEDLINE, EMBASE and Science Citation Index Expanded, through February 28, 2011. Summary relative risks (SRRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were summarized using a random-effects model. Between-study heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochran's Q and I-2 statistics. A total of 41 cohort studies (35 articles) were included in this systematic review. Combining 30 cohort studies which presented results on diabetes and CRC incidence, diabetes was associated with an increased incidence of CRC (SRRs 1.27, 95% CI: 1.21-1.34), with evident heterogeneity among studies (P = 0.002, I-2 = 48.4%). Subgroup analysis and meta-regression analysis by controlling the confounders showed that the increased incidence of CRC was independent of geographic locations, sex, family history of colorectal cancer, smoking, physical activity and body mass index. Diabetes was also positively associated with CRC mortality (SRR 1.20, 95% CI: 1.03-1.40), with evidence of heterogeneity between studies (P < 0.001, I-2 = 81.4%). Results from this systematic review support that compared to non-diabetic individuals, diabetic individuals have an increased risk of CRC.

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

4.6
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