Search

Background: Our systematic review summarizes the evidence concerning the accuracy of serum diagnostic and prognostic tests for colorectal cancer (CRC). Methods: The databases MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched iteratively to identify the relevant literature for serum markers of CRC published from 1950 to August 2012. The articles that provided adequate information to meet the requirements of the meta-analysis of diagnostic and prognostic markers were included. A 2-by-2 table of each diagnostic marker and its hazard ratio (HR) and the confidence interval (CI) of each prognostic marker was directly or indirectly extracted from the included papers, and the pooled sensitivity and specificity of the diagnostic marker and the pooled HR and the CI of the prognostic marker were subsequently calculated using the extracted data. Results: In total, 104 papers related to the diagnostic markers and 49 papers related to the prognostic serum markers of CRC were collected, and only 19 of 92 diagnostic markers were investigated in more than two studies, whereas 21 out of 44 prognostic markers were included in two or more studies. All of the pooled sensitivities of the diagnostic markers with > = 3 repetitions were less than 50%, and the meta-analyses of the prognostic markers with more than 3 studies were performed, VEGF with highest (2.245, CI: 1.347–3.744) and MMP-7 with lowest (1.099, CI: 1.018–1.187)) pooled HRs are presented. Conclusions: The quality of studies addressing the diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of the tests was poor, and the results were highly heterogeneous. The poor characteristics indicate that these tests are of little value for clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Objectives: Current studies give us inconsistent results regarding the association of neoplasms and zinc(II) serum and tissues concentrations. The results of to-date studies using meta-analysis are summarized in this paper. Methods: Web of Science (Science citation index expanded), PubMed (Medline), Embase and CENTRAL were searched. Articles were reviewed by two evaluators; quality was assessed by Newcastle-Ottawa scale; meta-analysis was performed including meta-regression and publication bias analysis. Results: Analysis was performed on 114 case control, cohort and cross-sectional studies of 22737 participants. Decreased serum zinc level was found in patients with lung (effect size = −1.04), head and neck (effect size = −1.43), breast (effect size = −0.93), liver (effect size = −2.29), stomach (effect size = −1.59), and prostate (effect size = −1.36) cancers; elevation was not proven in any tumor. More specific zinc patterns are evident at tissue level, showing increase in breast cancer tissue (effect size = 1.80) and decrease in prostatic (effect size = −3.90), liver (effect size = −8.26), lung (effect size = −3.12), and thyroid cancer (effect size = −2.84). The rest of the included tumors brought ambiguous results, both in serum and tissue zinc levels across the studies. The association between zinc level and stage or grade of tumor has not been revealed by meta-regression. Conclusion: This study provides evidence on cancer-specific tissue zinc level alteration. Although serum zinc decrease was associated with most tumors mentioned herein, further – prospective - studies are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The magnitude of the benefit associated with screening has been debated. We present a meta-analysis of quasi-experimental studies on the effects of mammography screening. Methods: We searched MEDLINE/PubMed and Embase for articles published through January 31, 2013. Studies were included if they reported: 1) a population-wide breast cancer screening program using mammography with 5+ years of data post-implementation; 2) a comparison group with equal access to therapies; and 3) breast cancer mortality. Studies excluded were: RCTs, case-control, or simulation studies. We defined quasi-experimental as studies that compared either geographical, historical or birth cohorts with a screening program to an equivalent cohort without a screening program. Meta-analyses were conducted in Stata using the metan command, random effects. Meta-analyses were conducted separately for ages screened: under 50, 50 to 69 and over 70 and weighted by population and person-years. Results: Among 4,903 published papers that were retrieved, 19 studies matched eligibility criteria. Birth cohort studies reported a significant benefit for women screened

Background: Some authors have studied the relationship between the presence of polyps, adenomas and cancers of upper gastrointestinal tract (stomach and duodenum) and risk of colorectal polyps and neoplasms; however, the results are controversial, which may be due to study sample size, populations, design, clinical features, and so on. No meta-analysis, which can be generalized to a larger population and could provide a quantitative pooled risk estimate of the relationship, of this issue existed so far. Methods: We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate risk of colorectal polyps or neoplasms in patients with polyps, adenomas or cancers in upper gastrointestinal tract comparing with controls. A search was conducted through PubMed, EMBASE, reference lists of potentially relevant papers, and practice guidelines up to 27 November 2013 without languages restriction. Odd ratios (ORs) were pooled using random-effects models. Results: The search yielded 3 prospective and 21 retrospective case-control studies (n = 37152 participants). The principal findings included: (1) OR for colorectal polyps was 1.15 (95% CI, 1.04–1.26) in the gastric polyps group comparing with control groups; (2) Patients with gastric polyps and neoplasms have higher risk (OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.06–1.62], and 1.72 [95% CI, 1.42–2.09], respectively) of colorectal neoplasms comparing with their controls; and (3) Positive association was found between the presence of colorectal neoplasms and sporadic duodenal neoplasms (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.64–4.11). Conclusions: Findings from present meta-analysis of 24 case-control studies suggest that the prevalence of colorectal polyps was higher in patients with gastric polyps than in those without gastric polyps, and the risk of colorectal neoplasms increases significantly in patients with gastric polyps, neoplasms, and duodenal neoplasms. Therefore, screening colonoscopy should be considered for patients with upper gastrointestinal polyps and neoplasms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]