-
Health Promotion Perspectives 2022Depression is the third leading cause of worldwide disease burden among youth, and nutrition- and diet-related behaviors have been considered as an effective strategy...
Depression is the third leading cause of worldwide disease burden among youth, and nutrition- and diet-related behaviors have been considered as an effective strategy for reducing the risk of depressive symptoms. This systematic review aims to examine associations between dietary intake and diet quality with depressive symptoms among youth. In this systematic review, a search of scientific articles published between 2000 and 2021 was performed in four databases (CINAHL, Embase, PsycInfo, and PubMed) according to the PRISMA checklist. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, observational studies that focused on associations between micronutrient, macronutrient, food group intake, and diet quality and depressive symptoms among youth, ages 3 to 18, were selected for review. Thirty-two articles met the review criteria. Dietary intake of magnesium, vitamin B12, fiber, fruits, vegetables, and fish were consistently inversely related to depressive symptoms. However, the evidence of associations between intake of vitamins B6, C, D, and E, iron, copper, zinc, omega-3 fatty acids, carbohydrate, and dietary fat and depressive symptoms was mixed. Dietary effects on decreased depressive symptoms were more pronounced in children than adolescents. Additionally, most studies failed to adjust for potential confounding variables. This review provides preliminary and comprehensive evidence for a relationship between dietary intake, diet quality, and depressive symptoms in youth. Although the results are heterogeneous and more research is needed, our findings indicate the importance of nutrition interventions for youth for decreasing depressive symptoms or for preventing further symptom exacerbation.
PubMed: 36686054
DOI: 10.34172/hpp.2022.32 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2018Studies on serum one-carbon metabolism factors (folate, B6, B12, homocysteine, and methionine) with lung cancer (LC) risk have produced inconsistent results. We aimed...
Studies on serum one-carbon metabolism factors (folate, B6, B12, homocysteine, and methionine) with lung cancer (LC) risk have produced inconsistent results. We aimed to systematically evaluate the association between them. This study was reported in accordance with the PRISMA Statement and was registered with PROSPERO (no. CRD42018086654). Relevant studies were searched in PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, and CNKI up to February 2018. Random-effects models were used to estimate the pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) or odds ratios (OR), as well as their 95% confidence interval (CI). Sensitivity and subgroup analysis were performed to identify the source of heterogeneity. Publication bias was also assessed. A total of 14 articles (8,097 patients) were included. The concentration of serum folate and vitamin B6 of LC patients were lower than the controls [SMD -0.53, 95% CI (-0.70, -0.35), = 0.001 and SMD -0.28, 95%CI (-0.53, -0.02), = 0.001, respectively]. While the concentration of homocysteine of the cases was higher than the controls [SMD 0.41, 95% CI (0.24, 0.59), = 0.001]. However, there were no significant differences between LC patients and the controls in terms of vitamin B12 and methionine [SMD -0.09, 95% CI (-0.27, 0.09), = 0.202 and SMD -0.13, 95% CI (-0.36, 0.10), = 0.001]. Subgroup analysis showed that these results were more significant in Europe, Asia, former and current smokers, and the male population (-value < 0.05). Serum folate and vitamin B6 might be protective factors against lung carcinogenesis and homocysteine could contribute to LC risk.
PubMed: 30430082
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2018.00493 -
Nutrients Apr 2020Previous evidence has suggested that vitamins might be beneficial for cognition. This systematic review aimed to investigate the efficacy of B vitamins, antioxidant... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Previous evidence has suggested that vitamins might be beneficial for cognition. This systematic review aimed to investigate the efficacy of B vitamins, antioxidant vitamins, and vitamin D on the cognitive function of non-demented middle-aged or older people. Randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of individuals aged 40 years or older were included. PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library databases, and other grey literature sources were searched up to November 2019. Their methodological quality was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Twenty-three studies on B vitamins ( 22-1053; comprising folate, B6, and B12), nine on antioxidant vitamins ( 185-20,469), and six on vitamin D ( 55-4122) were included. Taking B vitamins for over 3 months was beneficial for global cognition (standardized mean difference (SMD) -0.18, 95% CI -0.30 to -0.06) and episodic memory (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.15 to -0.04). However, antioxidant vitamins (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.03) and vitamin D (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.23) were not. Antioxidant vitamins were beneficial for global cognition in sensitivity analyses using final measurement data as mean difference estimates (SMD, -0.04, 95% CI -0.08 to -0.01). Taking B vitamins and possibly antioxidant vitamins may be beneficial for the cognitive function of non-demented people.
Topics: Adult; Age Factors; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antioxidants; Cognition; Female; Healthy Aging; Humans; Male; Memory, Episodic; Middle Aged; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vitamin B Complex; Vitamin D
PubMed: 32331312
DOI: 10.3390/nu12041168 -
Clinical Epidemiology 2018Various interventions have been tested as primary prevention of colorectal cancers (CRC), but comprehensive evidence comparing them is absent. We examined the effects of...
BACKGROUND
Various interventions have been tested as primary prevention of colorectal cancers (CRC), but comprehensive evidence comparing them is absent. We examined the effects of various chemopreventive agents (CPAs) on CRC incidence and mortality.
METHODS
We did a network meta-analysis based on a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared at least one CPA (aspirin, antioxidants, folic acid, vitamin B6, vitamin B12, calcium, vitamin D, alone or in combination) to placebo or other CPA in persons without history of CRC. Several databases were searched from inception up to March 2017. Primary outcomes were early and long-term CRC incidence and mortality.
RESULTS
Twenty-one RCTs comprising 281,063 participants, 9 RCTS comprising 160,101 participants, and 7 RCTs comprising 24,001 participants were included in the network meta-analysis for early risk of CRC incidence, long-term risk of CRC incidence and mortality, respectively. For early CRC incidence, no CPAs were found to be effective. For long-term CRC incidence and mortality, aspirin was the only intervention that showed protective effects with potential dose-dependent effects (risk ratio [RR], 0.74 [95% CI, 0.57-0.97] for high-dose [≥325 mg/day] and RR, 0.81 [95% CI, 0.67-0.98] for very-low-dose [≤100 mg/day]). Similar trend was found for mortality (RR, 0.43 [95% CI, 0.23-0.81] for low-dose [>100-325 mg/day] and RR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.45-0.94] for very-low-dose). However, in net clinical benefit analysis, when combining risk estimates on mortality from CRC, cardiovascular disease, and pooled risk estimates of major gastrointestinal bleeding, low-dose aspirin provided the highest net survival gain (%) of 1.736 [95% CI, 1.010-2.434].
CONCLUSION
Aspirin at the dose range of 75-325 mg/day is a safe and effective primary prevention for long-term CRC among people at average risk. None of the other CPAs were found to be effective. There may potentially be differential effects among various doses of aspirin that needs further investigation.
PubMed: 30349391
DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S174120 -
IUBMB Life Jan 2022Hyperhomocysteinemia is an independent predictor of the risk for cognitive decline and may be a result of low levels of vitamins B , B , and folate. Previous findings...
Hyperhomocysteinemia is an independent predictor of the risk for cognitive decline and may be a result of low levels of vitamins B , B , and folate. Previous findings suggest that adequate intake of these vitamins may reduce homocysteine levels. This review aimed to assess the effects of treatment with vitamins B B , and/or folic acid in the homocysteine levels in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). A systematic literature review was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE®, PsycINFO, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The research question was formulated using the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome (PICO) framework: in patients with MCI (P); what is the efficacy of vitamins B , B , and/or folic acid intake (I); compared with baseline values, and/or compared with controls (C); in reducing homocysteine levels from baseline (O). A total of eight primary studies with a total of 1,140 participants were included in the review. Four were randomized controlled trials, one was a quasi-controlled trial, and three were observational studies. All studies included folic acid in their intervention, seven vitamin B , and four vitamin B . Mean (SD) length of the intervention period was 18.8 (19.3) months, ranging from 1 to 60 months. All studies showed a statistically significant decrease in homocysteine levels in groups treated with vitamins B B , and/or folic acid compared to controls, with a mean decline of homocysteine concentration of 31.9% in the intervention arms whereas it increased by 0.7% in the control arm. This review identified evidence of a reduction of plasma homocysteine levels in MCI patients taking vitamins B B , and/or folic acid supplements, with statistically significant declines being observed after 1 month of supplementation. Findings support that supplementation with these vitamins might be an option to reduce homocysteine levels in people with MCI and elevated plasma homocysteine.
Topics: Cognitive Dysfunction; Dietary Supplements; Folic Acid; Homocysteine; Humans; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vitamin B 12; Vitamin B 6; Vitamins
PubMed: 34058062
DOI: 10.1002/iub.2507 -
Shokuhin Eiseigaku Zasshi. Journal of... 2017The interaction of levodopa and vitamin B6 is a well-known issue. This study investigated the incidence of unacceptable intake levels of vitamin B6 among levodopa users... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The interaction of levodopa and vitamin B6 is a well-known issue. This study investigated the incidence of unacceptable intake levels of vitamin B6 among levodopa users by means of a systematic review. We searched two databases (PubMed and "Igaku Chuo Zasshi") for articles about adverse events due to the interaction of levodopa and vitamin B6 published up to August 2017. Of 98 citations retrieved, 11 studies met the selection criteria. The results indicated that a vitamin B6 intake level of more than 50 mg/day could reduce the efficacy of levodopa. The recommended intake of vitamin B6 for Japanese adults is 1.4 mg/day for men and 1.2 mg/day for women. Therefore, the acceptable intake of vitamin B6 for levodopa patients would be within the range of the recommended intake level, which is also within the usual range in foods in Japan, except for dietary supplements or health foods. Levodopa users should be cautious about taking dietary supplements and over-the-counter drugs.
Topics: Databases, Bibliographic; Dietary Supplements; Drug Interactions; Female; Humans; Levodopa; Male; No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level; Nonprescription Drugs; Parkinson Disease; Vitamin B 6
PubMed: 29311446
DOI: 10.3358/shokueishi.58.268 -
Journal of Gynecology Obstetrics and... Jun 2024This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Pyridoxine compared to Dopaminergic agonists (cabergoline and bromocriptine) in post-partum lactation... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Review
This systematic review aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Pyridoxine compared to Dopaminergic agonists (cabergoline and bromocriptine) in post-partum lactation inhibition. Cochrane Central, PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Central, ScienceDirect, ClinicalTrials.gov, Web of Science, CINAHL and Google Scholar, covering the period from inception to November 2023. Additionally, the bibliographies of included articles and previous meta-analyses were screened for any relevant articles. The systematic review was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The outcomes of interest encompassed inhibition of lactation, breast pain/tenderness, breast engorgement, milk secretion, fever, mastitis, prolactin level and adverse events related to pyridoxine, cabergoline and bromocriptine. Methodological quality assessment was conducted using the Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool for rigorous evaluation. Three clinical trials assessed the effectiveness of pyridoxine and dopaminergic agents (cabergoline and bromocriptine) for lactation inhibition. It was assessed by using different assessment methods such as a scale for milk secretion, serum prolactin levels, and questionnaires for assessing breast engorgement, breast pain, and milk leakage. On the global assessment of the therapeutic efficacy of dopaminergic agents, it was found that there was significant inhibition of lactation as compared to pyridoxine (p < 0.001). In conclusion, this systematic review contributes significant insights into lactation inhibition interventions. Dopaminergic agonists, specifically cabergoline and bromocriptine, stand out as more effective and tolerable choices compared to Pyridoxine. These findings provide a foundation for informed clinical decisions and underscore the need for careful consideration of lactation inhibition strategies in diverse clinical contexts.
Topics: Humans; Bromocriptine; Female; Pyridoxine; Cabergoline; Dopamine Agonists; Lactation; Lactation Disorders; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 38554942
DOI: 10.1016/j.jogoh.2024.102783 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2019Vitamins and minerals are essential for growth and maintenance of a healthy body, and have a role in the functioning of almost every organ. Multiple interventions have... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Vitamins and minerals are essential for growth and maintenance of a healthy body, and have a role in the functioning of almost every organ. Multiple interventions have been designed to improve micronutrient deficiency, and food fortification is one of them.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the impact of food fortification with multiple micronutrients on health outcomes in the general population, including men, women and children.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched electronic databases up to 29 August 2018, including the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial (CENTRAL), the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group Specialised Register and Cochrane Public Health Specialised Register; MEDLINE; Embase, and 20 other databases, including clinical trial registries. There were no date or language restrictions. We checked reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews for additional papers to be considered for inclusion.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, quasi-randomised trials, controlled before-after (CBA) studies and interrupted time series (ITS) studies that assessed the impact of food fortification with multiple micronutrients (MMNs). Primary outcomes included anaemia, micronutrient deficiencies, anthropometric measures, morbidity, all-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality. Secondary outcomes included potential adverse outcomes, serum concentration of specific micronutrients, serum haemoglobin levels and neurodevelopmental and cognitive outcomes. We included food fortification studies from both high-income and low- and middle-income countries (LMICs).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently screened, extracted and quality-appraised the data from eligible studies. We carried out statistical analysis using Review Manager 5 software. We used random-effects meta-analysis for combining data, as the characteristics of study participants and interventions differed significantly. We set out the main findings of the review in 'Summary of findings' tables, using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified 127 studies as relevant through title/abstract screening, and included 43 studies (48 papers) with 19,585 participants (17,878 children) in the review. All the included studies except three compared MMN fortification with placebo/no intervention. Two studies compared MMN fortification versus iodised salt and one study compared MMN fortification versus calcium fortification alone. Thirty-six studies targeted children; 20 studies were conducted in LMICs. Food vehicles used included staple foods, such as rice and flour; dairy products, including milk and yogurt; non-dairy beverages; biscuits; spreads; and salt. Fourteen of the studies were fully commercially funded, 13 had partial-commercial funding, 14 had non-commercial funding and two studies did not specify the source of funding. We rated all the evidence as of low to very low quality due to study limitations, imprecision, high heterogeneity and small sample size. When compared with placebo/no intervention, MMN fortification may reduce anaemia by 32% (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56 to 0.84; 11 studies, 3746 participants; low-quality evidence), iron deficiency anaemia by 72% (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.39; 6 studies, 2189 participants; low-quality evidence), iron deficiency by 56% (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.60; 11 studies, 3289 participants; low-quality evidence); vitamin A deficiency by 58% (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.62; 6 studies, 1482 participants; low-quality evidence), vitamin B2 deficiency by 64% (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.68; 1 study, 296 participants; low-quality evidence), vitamin B6 deficiency by 91% (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.38; 2 studies, 301 participants; low-quality evidence), vitamin B12 deficiency by 58% (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.71; 3 studies, 728 participants; low-quality evidence), weight-for-age z-scores (WAZ) (mean difference (MD) 0.1, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.17; 8 studies, 2889 participants; low-quality evidence) and weight-for-height/length z-score (WHZ/WLZ) (MD 0.1, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.18; 6 studies, 1758 participants; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of MMN fortification on zinc deficiency (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.08; 5 studies, 1490 participants; low-quality evidence) and height/length-for-age z-score (HAZ/LAZ) (MD 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.18; 8 studies, 2889 participants; low-quality evidence). Most of the studies in this comparison were conducted in children. Subgroup analyses of funding sources (commercial versus non-commercial) and duration of intervention did not demonstrate any difference in effects, although this was a relatively small number of studies and the possible association between commercial funding and increased effect estimates has been demonstrated in the wider health literature. We could not conduct subgroup analysis by food vehicle and funding; since there were too few studies in each subgroup to draw any meaningful conclusions. When we compared MMNs versus iodised salt, we are uncertain about the effect of MMN fortification on anaemia (R 0.86, 95% CI 0.37 to 2.01; 1 study, 88 participants; very low-quality evidence), iron deficiency anaemia (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.83; 2 studies, 245 participants; very low-quality evidence), iron deficiency (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.17; 1 study, 88 participants; very low-quality evidence) and vitamin A deficiency (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.55; 2 studies, 363 participants; very low-quality evidence). Both of the studies were conducted in children. Only one study conducted in children compared MMN fortification versus calcium fortification. None of the primary outcomes were reported in the study. None of the included studies reported on morbidity, adverse events, all-cause or cause-specific mortality.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The evidence from this review suggests that MMN fortification when compared to placebo/no intervention may reduce anaemia, iron deficiency anaemia and micronutrient deficiencies (iron, vitamin A, vitamin B2 and vitamin B6). We are uncertain of the effect of MMN fortification on anthropometric measures (HAZ/LAZ, WAZ and WHZ/WLZ). There are no data to suggest possible adverse effects of MMN fortification, and we could not draw reliable conclusions from various subgroup analyses due to a limited number of studies in each subgroup. We remain cautious about the level of commercial funding in this field, and the possibility that this may be associated with higher effect estimates, although subgroup analysis in this review did not demonstrate any impact of commercial funding. These findings are subject to study limitations, imprecision, high heterogeneity and small sample sizes, and we rated most of the evidence low to very low quality. and hence no concrete conclusions could be drawn from the findings of this review.
Topics: Anemia, Iron-Deficiency; Food, Fortified; Health Status; Humans; Iodine; Micronutrients; Minerals; Nutrition Disorders; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sodium Chloride, Dietary; Vitamin A Deficiency; Vitamins
PubMed: 31849042
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011400.pub2 -
Clinical Chemistry and Laboratory... Nov 2020
PubMed: 33554504
DOI: 10.1515/cclm-2020-1684 -
Pain Medicine (Malden, Mass.) Apr 2020Cumulative evidence suggests an analgesic effect of thiamine, pyridoxine, and cyanocobalamin (TPC) in monotherapy, and also when combined with nonsteroidal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Cumulative evidence suggests an analgesic effect of thiamine, pyridoxine, and cyanocobalamin (TPC) in monotherapy, and also when combined with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), particularly diclofenac, in a synergistic manner. The aim of this review was to determine the effects of diclofenac combined with TPC compared with diclofenac monotherapy for low back pain (LBP) management.
METHODS
We searched for randomized clinical trials on the MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and Cochrane databases of records of clinical trials, among other sources. We evaluated the risk of bias regarding randomization, allocation concealment, blinding, incomplete outcome data, selective reporting, and other biases. A random-effects meta-analysis to examine patients with acute LBP (N = 1,108 adults) was performed, along with a subsequent sensitivity analysis.
RESULTS
Five studies in patients with LBP were included in the qualitative synthesis. Four of these studies in acute LBP were included in the first meta-analysis. A sensitivity test based on risk of bias (three moderate- to high-quality studies) found that the combination therapy of diclofenac plus TPC was associated with a significant reduction in the duration of treatment (around 50%) compared with diclofenac monotherapy (odds ratio = 2.23, 95% confidence interval = 1.59 to 3.13, P < 0.00001). We found no differences in the safety profile and patient satisfaction.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis demonstrated that combination therapy of diclofenac with TPC might have an analgesic superiority compared with diclofenac monotherapy in acute LBP. However, there is not enough evidence to recommend this therapy in other types of pain due to the scarcity of high-quality studies.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Diclofenac; Drug Therapy, Combination; Humans; Low Back Pain; Pain Measurement; Pyridoxine; Thiamine; Vitamin B 12; Vitamin B Complex
PubMed: 31529101
DOI: 10.1093/pm/pnz216