Correlation between allergy and cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

There is considerable inconsistency in results regarding the association of dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) with cancer risk. Wethereforeconducted this systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies to evaluate the relationship between dietary GI/GL and cancer risk. We searched PubMed and Web of Science for prospective cohort studies of dietary GI/GL in relation to risks of all types of cancer up to 31 March 2021. We used a random-effect model to calculate summary relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The certainty of evidence was assessed by the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. This study was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020215338). Overall, 55 cohorts were included in the meta-analysis. We assessed the relationship between dietary GI or GL and risks of 23 cancer types, including hormone-related cancers, cancers from digestive system, respiratory system, urinary system and other cancer sites. High GI diet increased overall risk of cancer with low certainty of evidence (highest vs lowest categories, n = 3, RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.07). For site-specific cancers, high GI diet increased risks of lung cancer (highest vs lowest categories, n = 5, RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.18) and breast cancer (highest vs lowest categories, n = 14, RR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09), especially for postmenopausal breast cancer (highest vs lowest categories, n = 10, RR 1.06, 95% CI 1.00-1.13), all with low certainty of evidence. Additionally, dietary GI was positively related to risk of bladder cancer with low certainty of evidence (highest vs lowest categories, n = 3, RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.09-1.40), as well as negatively related to ovarian cancer risk with very low certainty of evidence (highest vs lowest categories, n = 4, RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.69-1.00) and lymphoma risk with low certainty of evidence (highest vs lowest categories, n = 2, RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.98). Besides, we found an inverse association of dietary GL with lung cancer risk with low certainty of evidence (highest vs lowest categories, n = 5, RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.80-0.94). High dietary GI increased overall cancer risk with low certainty of evidence. For site-specific cancers, high GI diet increased the risks of breast cancer with low certainty of evidence and lung cancer with low certainty of evidence. Dietary GL was inversely associated with lung cancer risk with low certainty of evidence.

According to an article published in the December 20, 2000, issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA 2000 2843001-7), the use of handheld cellular telephones does not seem to beassociated with the risk of brain cancer, but further studies are neededto account for longer induction periods, especially for slow-growingtumours. Joshua E Muscat and colleagues, of the American HealthFoundation, Valhalla, NY, conducted a case-control study from 1994 to1998 to test the hypothesis that using handheld cellular telephones isrelated to the risk of primary brain cancer. Four hundred sixty-nine menand women aged 18 to 80 years with primary brain cancer and 422 matchedcontrols without brain cancer took part in the study. Patients wereinterviewed at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New YorkUniversity Medical Center, Columbia Presbyterian Hospital in NewYork, Rhode Island Hospital in Providence and Massachusetts GeneralHospital in Boston. According to background information cited in the study, there were morethan 86 million cellular phone users by the end of 1999. The use ofcellular telephones is one of several suspected risk factors for braincancer, although the causes of this disease remain poorly understood.The health effects caused by using cellular telephones are currentlybeing studied in a number of populations. In preliminary reports of acase-control study conducted in Sweden, the risk of brain cancer wasunrelated to using a handheld cellular telephone. Cellular telephones include handheld or mobile telephones, cartelephones, and portable or bag telephones that operate onradiofrequency (RF) signals in the 800-900 MHz range. Concerns havebeen raised about possible adverse health effects caused by exposure tothese signals. In particular, the concern that the use of handheldcellular telephones causes brain cancer is based on the close proximityof the antenna, which is incorporated into the telephone receiver, tothe head of the user. The authors used a structured questionnaire to interview patients. Thepatients were asked if they had ever used a handheld cellular telephoneon a regular basis. `Regular' was defined as having had a subscriptionto cellular telephone service. Information was obtained on the number ofyears of use, minutes/hours used per month, year of first use,manufacturer, and reported average monthly bill. Information on whichhand was used to hold the cellular telephone was collected from 700(78.6%) of the 891 patients. `The use of handheld cellular telephones was unrelated to the risk ofbrain cancer in the current study', the authors write. `The median monthly hours of use were 2.5 for cases and 2.2 forcontrols', they report. `Compared with patients who never used handheldcellular telephones, the multivariate odds ratio (OR) associated withregular past or current use was 0.85. The OR for infrequent users (lessthan 0.72 hours per month) was 1.0 and for frequent users (more than10.1 hours per month) was 0.7'. `The mean duration of use was 2.8 years for cases and 2.7 years forcontrols; no association with brain cancer was observed according toduration of use', they continue. The study found that among brain cancer cases, cerebral tumours occurredmore frequently on the same side of the head where cellular telephoneshad been used (26 versus 15 cases). But in cases of temporal lobe cancer, agreater percentage of tumours occurred in the opposite side of the head(9 versus 5 cases). The authors report the OR was less than 1.0 (i.e. no increase in risk)for all histologic categories of brain cancer except for an uncommontype of brain cancer called neuroepitheliomatous. `The current study shows no effect with short-term exposure to cellulartelephones that operate on (primarily) analogue signals', the authorsconclude. `Further studies are needed to account for longer inductionperiods, especially for slow-growing tumours. The RF fields emitted fromdigital cellular telephones might have different effects on biologicaltissue than analogue telephones, and studies are underway in severalEuropean countries that use primarily digital telecommunicationnetworks'.(This work was supported by a contract from WirelessTechnology Research LLC, and by grants from the Public Health Service,Washington, DC.)

Substantial effort is now under way to identify and follow up patients who have received a computed tomography (CT) scan, to determine whether any increased risk of cancer resulting from exposure to ionising radiation during a scan can be detected. CT scans are becoming an increasingly popular and effective diagnostic tool, and their usage has risen dramatically in economically developed countries (UNSCEAR 2010). Each CT scan delivers an effective dose of between several mSv and a few tens of mSv, depending on the type of scan (UNSCEAR 2010). The radiation risk models that have been developed from the epidemiological study of groups receiving moderate and high doses (such as the Japanese survivors of the atomic-bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki) imply that the excess risk of cancer resulting from the low doses received during a CT scan is small, so that large and carefully designed and conducted studies are necessary to discern this predicted small additional risk. Such studies are important because of the direct evidence that they can potentially provide on the levels of risk resulting from low doses of radiation. The findings of large studies of patients who have experienced a CT scan at a young age are starting to become available—studies of infants, children and adolescents are a sensible starting point because the risk of radiation-induced cancer is generally greater at younger ages at exposure (UNSCEAR 2013).

The Risk of Venous Thromboembolism (VTE) among Cancer Patients by Tumor Site: A Population-Based Study.

Cancer risks from diagnostic radiology: the impact of new epidemiological data

ObjectivesThere is an ongoing debate on the possible association between infections in early childhood and subsequent cancer risk, but it remains unclear if a hospital admission for infection is associated...

An updated meta-analysis on the association between 4-bp insertion/deletion (rs3783553) polymorphism within the 3`UTR of IL1A and the risk of cancer

Increasing evidence suggests significant associations between Parkinson disease (PD) and cancer risks. We conducted an updated review of studies that examined the risks of various cancer among PD patients and how this differed when cancer preceded PD diagnosis or PD diagnosis preceded cancer. Four databases were searched for studies that examined the association between PD and incidence of cancer from database inception to 4 June 2021. Three independent reviewers screened the articles for eligibility and extracted study data. Pooled relative risk with 95% confidence intervals were calculated using a random effects model. Forty studies involving 11 case-control studies, two nested case-control studies, 22 cohort studies, and five cross-sectional studies were included. Compared to controls, PD patients had lower risks of lung, genitourinary, gastrointestinal, and haematological cancers. Conversely, higher risks of melanoma and brain cancer were noted among PD patients. No association was found between PD and risk of female cancers. Subgroup analysis found negative associations between PD patients and risks of colon cancer, rectal cancer, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Findings from our meta-analysis suggest PD patients had lower risks of lung, genitourinary, gastrointestinal, and haematological cancers and increased risks of melanoma and brain cancer. Future research to investigate the underlying mechanisms between PD and cancers is warranted.

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who require urgent initiation of dialysis but without having a permanent dialysis access have traditionally commenced haemodialysis (HD) using a central venous catheter (CVC). However, several studies have reported that urgent initiation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) is a viable alternative option for such patients. This review aimed to examine the benefits and harms of urgent-start PD compared to HD initiated using a CVC in adults and children with CKD requiring long-term kidney replacement therapy. We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 25 May 2020 for randomised controlled trials through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. For non-randomised controlled trials, MEDLINE (OVID) (1946 to 11 February 2020) and EMBASE (OVID) (1980 to 11 February 2020) were searched. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-RCTs and non-RCTs comparing urgent-start PD to HD initiated using a CVC. Two authors extracted data and assessed the quality of studies independently. Additional information was obtained from the primary investigators. The estimates of effect were analysed using random-effects model and results were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The GRADE framework was used to make judgments regarding certainty of the evidence for each outcome. Overall, seven observational studies (991 participants) were included: three prospective cohort studies and four retrospective cohort studies. All the outcomes except one (bacteraemia) were graded as very low certainty of evidence given that all included studies were observational studies and few events resulting in imprecision, and inconsistent findings. Urgent-start PD may reduce the incidence of catheter-related bacteraemia compared with HD initiated with a CVC (2 studies, 301 participants: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.41; I2 = 0%; low certainty evidence), which translated into 131 fewer bacteraemia episodes per 1000 (95% CI 89 to 145 fewer). Urgent-start PD has uncertain effects on peritonitis risk (2 studies, 301 participants: RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.23 to 13.62; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence), exit-site/tunnel infection (1 study, 419 participants: RR 3.99, 95% CI 1.2 to 12.05; very low certainty evidence), exit-site bleeding (1 study, 178 participants: RR 0.12, 95% CI 0.01 to 2.33; very low certainty evidence), catheter malfunction (2 studies; 597 participants: RR 0.26, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.91; I2 = 66%; very low certainty evidence), catheter re-adjustment (2 studies, 225 participants: RR: 0.13; 95% CI 0.00 to 18.61; I2 = 92%; very low certainty evidence), technique survival (1 study, 123 participants: RR: 1.18, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.61; very low certainty evidence), or patient survival (5 studies, 820 participants; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.07; I2 = 0%; very low certainty evidence) compared with HD initiated using a CVC. Two studies using different methods of measurements for hospitalisation reported that hospitalisation was similar although one study reported higher hospitalisation rates in HD initiated using a catheter compared with urgent-start PD. Compared with HD initiated using a CVC, urgent-start PD may reduce the risk of bacteraemia and had uncertain effects on other complications of dialysis and technique and patient survival. In summary, there are very few studies directly comparing the outcomes of urgent-start PD and HD initiated using a CVC for patients with CKD who need to commence dialysis urgently. This evidence gap needs to be addressed in future studies.

BackgroundSpinal cord stimulation (SCS) has emerged as an important treatment for chronic pain disorders. While there is evidence supporting improvement in pain intensity with SCS therapy, efforts to synthesize the...

Observational studies have shown that cholelithiasis and cholecystectomy are associated with the risk of breast cancer (BC) and gynecological cancers, but whether these relationships are causal has not been established and remains controversial. Our study began with a meta-analysis that synthesized data from prior observational studies to examine the association between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and the risk of BC and gynecological cancers. Subsequently, a two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis was conducted utilizing genetic variant data to investigate the potential causal relationship between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and the aforementioned cancers. The results of the meta-analysis demonstrated a significant association between cholecystectomy and the risk of BC (risk ratio [RR]=1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.06, p=0.002) and endometrial cancer (EC) (RR=1.26, 95% CI: 1.02-1.56, p=0.031). Conversely, no significant association was observed between cholelithiasis and the risk of BC, EC, and ovarian cancer. The MR analysis revealed no discernible causal connection between cholelithiasis and overall BC (p=0.053), as well as BC subtypes (including estrogen receptor-positive/negative). Similarly, there was no causal effect of cholecystectomy on BC risk (p=0.399) and its subtypes. Furthermore, no causal associations were identified between cholelithiasis, cholecystectomy, and the risk of gynecological cancers (ovarian, endometrial, and cervical cancer [CC]) (all p>0.05). This study does not support a causal link between cholelithiasis and cholecystectomy and an increased risk of female cancers such as breast, endometrial, ovarian, and CC.

PurposeThe aim of current systematic review was to update the body of evidence on associations between adherence to the Mediterranean diet (MedDiet) and risk of cancer mortality, site-specific cancer in the general population; all-cause, and cancer mortality as well as cancer reoccurrence among cancer survivors.MethodsA literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), case–control and cohort studies published up to April 2020 was performed using PubMed and Scopus. Study-specific risk estimates for the highest versus lowest adherence to the MedDiet category were pooled using random-effects meta-analyses. Certainty of evidence from cohort studies and RCTs was evaluated using the NutriGrade scoring system.ResultsThe updated search revealed 44 studies not identified in the previous review. Altogether, 117 studies including 3,202,496 participants were enclosed for meta-analysis. The highest adherence to MedDiet was inversely associated with cancer mortality (RRcohort: 0.87, 95% CI 0.82, 0.92; N = 18 studies), all-cause mortality among cancer survivors (RRcohort: 0.75, 95% CI 0.66, 0.86; N = 8), breast (RRobservational: 0.94, 95% CI 0.90, 0.97; N = 23), colorectal (RRobservational: 0.83, 95% CI 0.76, 0.90; N = 17), head and neck (RRobservational: 0.56, 95% CI 0.44, 0.72; N = 9), respiratory (RRcohort: 0.84, 95% CI 0.76, 0.94; N = 5), gastric (RRobservational: 0.70, 95% CI 0.61, 0.80; N = 7), bladder (RRobservational: 0.87, 95% CI 0.76, 0.98; N = 4), and liver cancer (RRobservational: 0.64, 95% CI 0.54, 0.75; N = 4). Adhering to MedDiet did not modify risk of blood, esophageal, pancreatic and prostate cancer risk.ConclusionIn conclusion, our results suggest that highest adherence to the MedDiet was related to lower risk of cancer mortality in the general population, and all-cause mortality among cancer survivors as well as colorectal, head and neck, respiratory, gastric, liver and bladder cancer risks. Moderate certainty of evidence from cohort studies suggest an inverse association for cancer mortality and colorectal cancer, but most of the comparisons were rated as low or very low certainty of evidence.

Interventions for preventing nausea and vomiting in women undergoing regional anaesthesia for caesarean section.

Treatments for breast engorgement during lactation.

Interventions for the management of transient tachypnoea of the newborn - an overview of systematic reviews.