2005
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-143-2-200507190-00024
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

High-Dosage Vitamin E Supplementation and All-Cause Mortality

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There is some reason for caution with respect to high level human dosing in patients with compromised health status; one meta-analysis of the dose-response relationship between vitamin E supplements and all-cause mortality revealed an increase in all-cause mortality and resulted in the author's recommendation to avoid vitamin E supplements ≥ 400 IU/day (114). That meta-analysis has been criticized based on multiple issues (115120). Current US UL for healthy adults is 1000 mg/day, corresponding to 1500 IU/day.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is some reason for caution with respect to high level human dosing in patients with compromised health status; one meta-analysis of the dose-response relationship between vitamin E supplements and all-cause mortality revealed an increase in all-cause mortality and resulted in the author's recommendation to avoid vitamin E supplements ≥ 400 IU/day (114). That meta-analysis has been criticized based on multiple issues (115120). Current US UL for healthy adults is 1000 mg/day, corresponding to 1500 IU/day.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Though, a recent meta-analysis of 19 clinical trials concluded that the regular administration of high-dose vitamin E supplements (P400 IU/day) is associated with a small but statistically significant increase of mortality (Miller et al, 2005). A number of critical comments were addressed to Miller and colleagues' metaanalysis regarding the statistical methods used, the lack of controlling for study quality and publication or selection bias (see Baggott, 2005;Blatt and Pryor, 2005;DeZee et al, 2005;Hemila, 2005;Jialal and Devaraj, 2005;Krishnan et al, 2005;Lim et al, 2005;Marras et al, 2005;Meydani et al, 2005b;Miller et al, 2005;Possolo, 2005).…”
Section: Meta-analysesmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The analysis was highly disputed and criticized for inconsistencies, biased selection of studies included in the meta-analysis, and even for inappropriate handling of data [3,8,18,21,27,34,42,49,53,55,64]. However, the authors might not be completely wrong in view of recent reports on harmful effects of atocopherol supplementation.…”
Section: Meta-analyses Of the Intervention Studiesmentioning
confidence: 99%