Dietary components and the risk of non-melanoma skin cancer: A systematic review of epidemiological studies

Hezaveh, Erfan; Jafari, Sahar; Jalilpiran, Yahya; Zargarzadeh, Nikan; Mahdavi, Reza; Gargari, Bahram Pourghassem

doi:10.1080/10408398.2021.2016600

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 98 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…( 2022 ) Urothelial carcinoma Folate intake and P/S folate PCs, NCCs, CCs Pubmed and eMBASe databases Until October 2019 8 PCs +2 NCCs [9 assessed dietary folate intake and 1 plasma folate] RR (highest vs. lowest) = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.87–1.09, p = 0.638; I 2 0% Positive associations in two studies (Bassett et al., 2019 ) (RR Q5 vs. Q1 1.27, 95% CI 0.81, 2.00; <9.3 vs. >17.0 nmol/L) and (Michaud et al., 2002 ) (RR Q5 vs. Q1 1.16, 95% CI 0.82, 1.64; median Q1 257.3 vs. Q5 400.2 μg/day natural folate); null or negative associations in other studies Hezaveh et al. ( 2021 ) Incidence of non‐melanoma skin cancer (BCC, SCC or both) or overall skin cancer Folate intake Cohort studies and CCs Scopus, ISI Web of Science and PubMed From 2000 to July 2021 4 PCs Not pooled (few studies and heterogeneous) Positive association in two studies with BCC risk (RR positive in all quintiles vs. Q1 < 284 μg/day total folate, RR Q5 vs. Q1 1.19, 95% CI 1.01, 1.40 (van Dam et al., 2000 ); positive in all quintiles versus Q1, median Q1 208 μg/day total folate, RR Q5 vs. Q1 : 1.2 95% CI:1.1–1.3 (Fung et al. 2002).…”

Section: Flow Chart For the Selection Of Studies On Dose–response For...mentioning

confidence: 89%

Scientific opinion on the tolerable upper intake level for folate

Turck,

Bohn,

Castenmiller

et al. 2023

EFS2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following a request from the European Commission (EC), the EFSA Panel on Nutrition, Novel Foods and Food Allergens (NDA) was asked to deliver a scientific opinion on the revision of the tolerable upper intake level (UL) for folic acid/folate. Systematic reviews of the literature were conducted to assess evidence on priority adverse health effects of excess intake of folate (including folic acid and the other authorised forms, (6S)-5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid glucosamine and l-5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid calcium salts), namely risk of cobalamin-dependent neuropathy, cognitive decline among people with low cobalamin status, and colorectal cancer and prostate cancer. The evidence is insufficient to conclude on a positive and causal relationship between the dietary intake of folate and impaired cognitive function, risk of colorectal and prostate cancer. The risk of progression of neurological symptoms in cobalamin-deficient patients is considered as the critical effect to establish an UL for folic acid. No new evidence has been published that could improve the characterisation of the dose-response between folic acid intake and resolution of megaloblastic anaemia in cobalamin-deficient individuals. The ULs for folic acid previously established by the Scientific Committee on Food are retained for all population groups, i.e. 1000 μg/day for adults, including pregnant and lactating women, 200 μg/day for children aged 1-3 years, 300 μg/day for 4-6 years, 400 μg/day for 7-10 years, 600 μg/day for 11-14 years and 800 μg/ day for 15-17 years. A UL of 200 μg/day is established for infants aged 4-11 months. The ULs apply to the combined intake of folic acid, (6S)-5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid glucosamine and l-5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid calcium salts, under their authorised conditions of use.It is unlikely that the ULs for supplemental folate are exceeded in European populations, except for regular users of food supplements containing high doses of folic acid/5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid salts. K E Y W O R D S folate, folic acid, 5-methyltetrahydrofolic acid salt, tolerable upper intake level 2 of 119 |

show abstract