Papers/PMID:24148607
Association between zinc intake and risk of digestive tract cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Clinical nutrition (Edinburgh, Scotland)2014The record
3 findings · 1 compound · 3 endpoints · 2 null
What it reported
How to read these marksWhat moved
1 finding
Zn(2+) — decreases colorectal cancer incidence
Very limitedEvidence strength: very limited. Human evidence with major recorded weaknesses, or non-human, uncontrolled or unverified evidence.Finding“Comparing the highest with lowest categories, higher zinc intake was significantly associated with reduced colorectal cancer risk (pooled RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.92; p = 0.002), while zinc intake was not statistically associated with gastric cancer risk (pooled RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.64-1.29; p = 0.581) or esophageal cancer risk (pooled RR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.44-1.17; p = 0.187).”
Quoted verbatim from Association between zinc intake and risk of digestive tract cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. - Study
- meta-analysis
- Population
- Adults in observational studies; highest versus lowest category of dietary zinc intake
Effect 0.8 risk ratio, 95% CI 0.7 to 0.92
Association between zinc intake and risk of digestive tract cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.2014PMID:24148607Permalink
What did not
2 findings
Zn(2+) — no detected effect on gastric cancer incidence
Very limitedEvidence strength: very limited. Human evidence with major recorded weaknesses, or non-human, uncontrolled or unverified evidence.FindingNull result“Comparing the highest with lowest categories, higher zinc intake was significantly associated with reduced colorectal cancer risk (pooled RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.92; p = 0.002), while zinc intake was not statistically associated with gastric cancer risk (pooled RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.64-1.29; p = 0.581) or esophageal cancer risk (pooled RR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.44-1.17; p = 0.187).”
Quoted verbatim from Association between zinc intake and risk of digestive tract cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. - Study
- meta-analysis
- Population
- Adults in observational studies; highest versus lowest category of dietary zinc intake
Effect 0.91 risk ratio, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.29
Association between zinc intake and risk of digestive tract cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.2014PMID:24148607Permalink
Zn(2+) — no detected effect on oesophageal cancer incidence
Very limitedEvidence strength: very limited. Human evidence with major recorded weaknesses, or non-human, uncontrolled or unverified evidence.FindingNull result“Comparing the highest with lowest categories, higher zinc intake was significantly associated with reduced colorectal cancer risk (pooled RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.70-0.92; p = 0.002), while zinc intake was not statistically associated with gastric cancer risk (pooled RR = 0.91, 95% CI: 0.64-1.29; p = 0.581) or esophageal cancer risk (pooled RR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.44-1.17; p = 0.187).”
Quoted verbatim from Association between zinc intake and risk of digestive tract cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.. - Study
- meta-analysis
- Population
- Adults in observational studies; highest versus lowest category of dietary zinc intake
Effect 0.72 risk ratio, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.17
Association between zinc intake and risk of digestive tract cancers: a systematic review and meta-analysis.2014PMID:24148607Permalink