2017
DOI: 10.12669/pjms.333.11753
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Association between Vitamin D deficiency and Breast Cancer

Abstract: Objective:To determine the association between vitamin D deficiency and breast cancer.Methods:This case control study included 94 female patients aged 20-75 years of any marital status and parity. Newly diagnosed 42 breast cancer patients who presented to surgical OPD of Dow University Hospital from Jan 2016 to June 2016 were included into the study as “cases” after informed consent. Age-matched 52 females who presented to OPD for complain other than breast pathology were included as the “control group”. The s… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

8
36
1

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(45 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
8
36
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In other words, the higher the vitamin D level, the less likely would be the risk of having IBC. A similar association between low vitamin D and breast cancer was also observed in case–control studies of Jordanian,[20] Indian,[21] and Pakistani women[22] breast and nonbreast cancer. Interestingly, in Iranian women, low vitamin D was associated with risk of breast cancer only in postmenopausal women.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…In other words, the higher the vitamin D level, the less likely would be the risk of having IBC. A similar association between low vitamin D and breast cancer was also observed in case–control studies of Jordanian,[20] Indian,[21] and Pakistani women[22] breast and nonbreast cancer. Interestingly, in Iranian women, low vitamin D was associated with risk of breast cancer only in postmenopausal women.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…Similar findings of protective role of vitamin D against breast cancer are reported from studies in Indian populations [52,58]. Two studies done in Pakistan have only descriptive analysis in one [59] and small sample size in the other study [60].…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Among the case-control studies, 19 studies [12,21,24,27,30,32,33,35,37,41,43,44,46,48,54,55,62,64,65] were rated one star for the item of representativeness of the cases since they selected consecutive eligible cases in a defined area over a defined period. However, selection bias was still possible as only 12 studies recruited controls from the same community as the cases, while the remaining studies either used a hospital-based design [22][23][24]27,28,[30][31][32]35,39,[42][43][44][45]47,48,50,52,53,[55][56][57]59,60,63,65] or provided no description of the source [25,26,29,…”
Section: Methodological Qualitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…No eligible cohort study was included in this comparison. In the 41 case-control studies [12,14,[21][22][23][24][25][26][27]29,[31][32][33][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63][64], a 20% risk increase (OR = 1.20; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.07 to 1.35) for breast cancer was detected in the unmarried women versus the married women, with considerable heterogeneity (I 2 = 82%; 95% CI: 77% to 87%). The meta-regression identified geographic region as a potential source of heterogeneity (P = 0.004) (S2 File).…”
Section: Effect Estimatesmentioning
confidence: 99%