Association between markers of glucose metabolism and risk of colorectal cancer

Objectives

Independent epidemiological studies have evaluated the association between markers of glucose metabolism (including fasting glucose, fasting insulin, homeostasis model of risk assessment-insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and C peptide) and the risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). However, such associations have not been systematically analysed and no clear conclusions have been drawn. Therefore, we addressed this issue using a meta-analysis approach.

Design

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Data sources

PubMed and EMBASE were searched up to May 2015.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Either a fixed-effects or random-effects model was adopted to estimate overall ORs for the association between markers of glucose metabolism and the risk of CRC. In addition, dose–response, meta-regression, subgroup and publication bias analyses were conducted.

Results

35 studies involving 25 566 patients and 5 706 361 participants were included. Higher levels of fasting glucose, fasting insulin, HOMA-IR, HbA1c and C peptide were all significantly associated with increased risk of CRC (fasting glucose, pooled OR=1.12, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.18; fasting insulin, pooled OR=1.42, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.69; HOMA-IR, pooled OR=1.47, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.74; HbA1c, pooled OR=1.22, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.47 (with borderline significance); C peptide, pooled OR=1.27, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.49). Subgroup analysis suggested that a higher HOMA-IR value was significantly associated with CRC risk in all subgroups, including gender, study design and geographic region. For the relative long-term markers, the association was significant for HbA1c in case–control studies, while C peptide was significantly associated with CRC risk in both the male group and colon cancer.

Conclusions

The real-time composite index HOMA-IR is a better indicator for CRC risk than are fasting glucose and fasting insulin. The relative long-term markers, HbA1c and C peptide, are also valid predictors for CRC risk. Considering the included case–control studies in the current analysis, more cohort studies are warranted to enhance future analysis.

from #Medicine via ola Kala on Inoreader http://ift.tt/29b9aYD
via IFTTT