-
Food Chemistry May 2021Lycopene is a potent lipophilic antioxidant in tomato. We aim to clarify the evidence for associations between tomato and lycopene and multiple health outcomes. Umbrella... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Lycopene is a potent lipophilic antioxidant in tomato. We aim to clarify the evidence for associations between tomato and lycopene and multiple health outcomes. Umbrella review of meta-analyses and systematic reviews was performed in humans. A total of 174 articles were searched, 17 articles with 20 health outcomes were identified by eligibility criteria. Tomato intake was inversely associated with all-cause mortality, coronary heart disease mortality, cerebrovascular disease mortality, prostate cancer, and gastric cancer. Dietary lycopene intake or serum lycopene was inversely associated with all-cause mortality, prostate cancer, stroke, cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, and male infertility. Caution was warranted for potential allergy and pollution. The quality of the vast majority of evidence by GRADE was low or very low with the remaining six as moderate. The intake of tomato or lycopene was generally safe and beneficial for multiple health outcomes in humans. But the quality of the evidence was not high.
Topics: Antioxidants; Cardiovascular Diseases; Humans; Lycopene; Solanum lycopersicum; Male; Prostatic Neoplasms; Stomach Neoplasms; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 33131949
DOI: 10.1016/j.foodchem.2020.128396 -
Dermatologic Surgery : Official... Jan 2023Treatments for solar lentigines include topical and physical therapies, including chemical peels, lasers, intense pulsed light, and cryotherapy. A direct comparison of...
BACKGROUND
Treatments for solar lentigines include topical and physical therapies, including chemical peels, lasers, intense pulsed light, and cryotherapy. A direct comparison of treatment methods and their efficacy is lacking.
OBJECTIVE
To compare treatment efficacy and adverse events for different treatment modalities for lentigines.
METHODS
Cochrane, MEDLINE, and Embase databases were searched on August 25, 2021. Studies were included if they met our predetermined population, intervention, comparator, outcomes, study design framework. Results are presented in narrative form.
RESULTS
Forty-eight articles met the inclusion criteria, representing a total of 1,763 patients. Overall, combination-based treatments showed the greatest frequency of cases with complete response (65%, n = 299/458), followed by laser-based treatments (43%, n = 395/910), topical retinoids (21%, n = 12/57), cryotherapy (15%, n = 25/169), and peels (6%, n = 8/125). Adverse events occurred most commonly while using topical retinoids (82%, n = 23/28), followed by combination-based treatments (39%, n = 184/466), cryotherapy (33%, n = 47/144), laser-based treatments (23%, n = 173/738), and peels (19%, n = 21/110).
CONCLUSION
Despite heterogeneity of included study designs, patient populations, treatment regimens, and outcome measures, our results suggest that combination-based treatments and laser-based treatments were the most efficacious treatment modalities. Although cryotherapy was previously considered first-line, our results show that it has substantially lower pooled response rates compared with other treatment modalities.
Topics: Humans; Lentigo; Chemexfoliation; Cryotherapy; Photochemotherapy; Retinoids
PubMed: 36533790
DOI: 10.1097/DSS.0000000000003630 -
Nutrients Aug 2021Astaxanthin (ASX), a xanthophyll carotenoid derived from microalgae , mitigating skin photoaging and age-related skin diseases by its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
CONTEXT
Astaxanthin (ASX), a xanthophyll carotenoid derived from microalgae , mitigating skin photoaging and age-related skin diseases by its antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects in animal studies.
OBJECTIVE
The aim was to systematically evaluate if ASX applications have anti-ageing effects in humans.
METHODS
A comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science found a total of eleven studies. Nine randomised, controlled human studies assessed oral ASX effects and two open-label, prospective studies evaluated topical, oral-topical ASX effects on skin ageing. was used to extract mean values and standard deviations of baseline and endpoint, and Cochrane Collaboration's tool assessed RoB for all included studies. Review Manager 5.4 was used to conduct meta-analysis of RCTs; the results were reported as effect size ± 95% confidence interval.
RESULTS
Oral ASX supplementation significantly restored moisture content (SMD = 0.53; 95% CI = 0.05, 1.01; I = 52%; = 0.03) and improved elasticity (SMD = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.19, 1.35; I = 75%; = 0.009) but did not significantly decrease wrinkle depth (SMD = -0.26; 95% CI = -0.58, 0.06; I = 0%; = 0.11) compared to placebo. Open-label, prospective studies suggested slightly protective effects of topical and oral-topical ASX applications on skin ageing.
CONCLUSIONS
Ingestion and/or topical usages of ASX may be effective in reducing skin ageing and have promising cosmetical potential, as it improves moisture content and elasticity and reduces wrinkles.
Topics: Administration, Oral; Administration, Topical; Adult; Aged; Aging; Animals; Anti-Inflammatory Agents; Antioxidants; Chlorophyta; Cosmetics; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin; Skin Aging; Xanthophylls; Young Adult
PubMed: 34578794
DOI: 10.3390/nu13092917 -
Nutrients Dec 2022Lycopene is a nutraceutical with health-promoting and anti-cancer activities, but due to a lack of evidence, there are no recommendations regarding its use and dosage.... (Review)
Review
Lycopene is a nutraceutical with health-promoting and anti-cancer activities, but due to a lack of evidence, there are no recommendations regarding its use and dosage. This review aimed to evaluate the benefits of lycopene supplementation in cancer prevention and treatment based on the results of in vivo studies. We identified 72 human and animal studies that were then analysed for endpoints such as cancer incidence, improvement in treatment outcomes, and the mechanisms of lycopene action. We concluded that the results of most of the reviewed in vivo studies confirmed the anti-cancer activities of lycopene. Most of the studies concerned prostate cancer, reflecting the number of in vitro studies. The reported mechanisms of lycopene action in vivo included regulation of oxidative and inflammatory processes, induction of apoptosis, and inhibition of cell division, angiogenesis, and metastasis formation. The predominance of particular mechanisms seemed to depend on tumour organ localisation and the local storage capacity of lycopene. Finally, there is a need to look for predictive factors to identify a population that may benefit from lycopene supplementation. The potential candidates appear to be race, single nucleotide polymorphisms in carotene-cleaving enzymes, some genetic abbreviations, and insulin-like growth factor-dependent and inflammatory diseases.
Topics: Male; Animals; Humans; Lycopene; Carotenoids; Prostatic Neoplasms; Apoptosis; Dietary Supplements
PubMed: 36501182
DOI: 10.3390/nu14235152 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Acne is an inflammatory disorder with a high global burden. It is common in adolescents and primarily affects sebaceous gland-rich areas. The clinical benefit of the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Acne is an inflammatory disorder with a high global burden. It is common in adolescents and primarily affects sebaceous gland-rich areas. The clinical benefit of the topical acne treatments azelaic acid, salicylic acid, nicotinamide, sulphur, zinc, and alpha-hydroxy acid is unclear.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of topical treatments (azelaic acid, salicylic acid, nicotinamide, zinc, alpha-hydroxy acid, and sulphur) for acne.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to May 2019: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registers.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Clinical randomised controlled trials of the six topical treatments compared with other topical treatments, placebo, or no treatment in people with acne.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Key outcomes included participants' global self-assessment of acne improvement (PGA), withdrawal for any reason, minor adverse events (assessed as total number of participants who experienced at least one minor adverse event), and quality of life.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 49 trials (3880 reported participants) set in clinics, hospitals, research centres, and university settings in Europe, Asia, and the USA. The vast majority of participants had mild to moderate acne, were aged between 12 to 30 years (range: 10 to 45 years), and were female. Treatment lasted over eight weeks in 59% of the studies. Study duration ranged from three months to three years. We assessed 26 studies as being at high risk of bias in at least one domain, but most domains were at low or unclear risk of bias. We grouped outcome assessment into short-term (less than or equal to 4 weeks), medium-term (from 5 to 8 weeks), and long-term treatment (more than 8 weeks). The following results were measured at the end of treatment, which was mainly long-term for the PGA outcome and mixed length (medium-term mainly) for minor adverse events. Azelaic acid In terms of treatment response (PGA), azelaic acid is probably less effective than benzoyl peroxide (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72 to 0.95; 1 study, 351 participants), but there is probably little or no difference when comparing azelaic acid to tretinoin (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.14; 1 study, 289 participants) (both moderate-quality evidence). There may be little or no difference in PGA when comparing azelaic acid to clindamycin (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.38; 1 study, 229 participants; low-quality evidence), but we are uncertain whether there is a difference between azelaic acid and adapalene (1 study, 55 participants; very low-quality evidence). Low-quality evidence indicates there may be no differences in rates of withdrawal for any reason when comparing azelaic acid with benzoyl peroxide (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.29; 1 study, 351 participants), clindamycin (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.48 to 3.56; 2 studies, 329 participants), or tretinoin (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.47; 2 studies, 309 participants), but we are uncertain whether there is a difference between azelaic acid and adapalene (1 study, 55 participants; very low-quality evidence). In terms of total minor adverse events, we are uncertain if there is a difference between azelaic acid compared to adapalene (1 study; 55 participants) or benzoyl peroxide (1 study, 30 participants) (both very low-quality evidence). There may be no difference when comparing azelaic acid to clindamycin (RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.67 to 3.35; 1 study, 100 participants; low-quality evidence). Total minor adverse events were not reported in the comparison of azelaic acid versus tretinoin, but individual application site reactions were reported, such as scaling. Salicylic acid For PGA, there may be little or no difference between salicylic acid and tretinoin (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.09; 1 study, 46 participants; low-quality evidence); we are not certain whether there is a difference between salicylic acid and pyruvic acid (1 study, 86 participants; very low-quality evidence); and PGA was not measured in the comparison of salicylic acid versus benzoyl peroxide. There may be no difference between groups in withdrawals when comparing salicylic acid and pyruvic acid (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.50; 1 study, 86 participants); when salicylic acid was compared to tretinoin, neither group had withdrawals (both based on low-quality evidence (2 studies, 74 participants)). We are uncertain whether there is a difference in withdrawals between salicylic acid and benzoyl peroxide (1 study, 41 participants; very low-quality evidence). For total minor adverse events, we are uncertain if there is any difference between salicylic acid and benzoyl peroxide (1 study, 41 participants) or tretinoin (2 studies, 74 participants) (both very low-quality evidence). This outcome was not reported for salicylic acid versus pyruvic acid, but individual application site reactions were reported, such as scaling and redness. Nicotinamide Four studies evaluated nicotinamide against clindamycin or erythromycin, but none measured PGA. Low-quality evidence showed there may be no difference in withdrawals between nicotinamide and clindamycin (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.49 to 2.60; 3 studies, 216 participants) or erythromycin (RR 1.40, 95% CI 0.46 to 4.22; 1 study, 158 participants), or in total minor adverse events between nicotinamide and clindamycin (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.99; 3 studies, 216 participants; low-quality evidence). Total minor adverse events were not reported in the nicotinamide versus erythromycin comparison. Alpha-hydroxy (fruit) acid There may be no difference in PGA when comparing glycolic acid peel to salicylic-mandelic acid peel (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.26; 1 study, 40 participants; low-quality evidence), and we are uncertain if there is a difference in total minor adverse events due to very low-quality evidence (1 study, 44 participants). Neither group had withdrawals (2 studies, 84 participants; low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared to benzoyl peroxide, azelaic acid probably leads to a worse treatment response, measured using PGA. When compared to tretinoin, azelaic acid probably makes little or no difference to treatment response. For other comparisons and outcomes the quality of evidence was low or very low. Risk of bias and imprecision limit our confidence in the evidence. We encourage the comparison of more methodologically robust head-to-head trials against commonly used active drugs.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Adapalene; Adolescent; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Benzoyl Peroxide; Bias; Child; Clindamycin; Dermatologic Agents; Dicarboxylic Acids; Erythromycin; Female; Glycolates; Humans; Keratolytic Agents; Male; Mandelic Acids; Niacinamide; Patient Dropouts; Pyruvic Acid; Quality of Life; Salicylic Acid; Sulfur; Tretinoin; Young Adult; Zinc
PubMed: 32356369
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011368.pub2 -
Acta Ophthalmologica Dec 2022The aim of this paper is to summarize all available evidence from systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative nonrandomized studies (NRS) on... (Review)
Review
The aim of this paper is to summarize all available evidence from systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative nonrandomized studies (NRS) on the association between nutrition and antioxidant, vitamin, and mineral supplements and the development or progression of age-related macular degeneration (AMD). The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane register CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase were searched and studies published between January 2015 and May 2021 were included. The certainty of evidence was assessed according to the GRADE methodology. The main outcome measures were development of AMD, progression of AMD, and side effects. We included 7 systematic reviews, 7 RCTs, and 13 NRS. A high consumption of specific nutrients, i.e. β-carotene, lutein and zeaxanthin, copper, folate, magnesium, vitamin A, niacin, vitamin B6, vitamin C, docosahexaenoic acid, and eicosapentaenoic acid, was associated with a lower risk of progression of early to late AMD (high certainty of evidence). Use of antioxidant supplements and adherence to a Mediterranean diet, characterized by a high consumption of vegetables, whole grains, and nuts and a low consumption of red meat, were associated with a decreased risk of progression of early to late AMD (moderate certainty of evidence). A high consumption of alcohol was associated with a higher risk of developing AMD (moderate certainty of evidence). Supplementary vitamin C, vitamin E, or β-carotene were not associated with the development of AMD, and supplementary omega-3 fatty acids were not associated with progression to late AMD (high certainty of evidence). Research in the last 35 years included in our overview supports that a high intake of specific nutrients, the use of antioxidant supplements and adherence to a Mediterranean diet decrease the risk of progression of early to late AMD.
Topics: Humans; Antioxidants; Ascorbic Acid; beta Carotene; Dietary Supplements; Macular Degeneration; Vitamins
PubMed: 35695158
DOI: 10.1111/aos.15191 -
Dermatologic Therapy Apr 2022Acne vulgaris is one of the most common dermatologic complaints. Recently, isotretinoin has been used as an off-label indication for the treatment of mild-to-moderate... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Acne vulgaris is one of the most common dermatologic complaints. Recently, isotretinoin has been used as an off-label indication for the treatment of mild-to-moderate grades of acne not responding to conventional treatment. Its conventional recommended dose is 0.5-1.0 mg/kg per day to the cumulative dose of 120-150 mg/kg. To qualify the state of evidence and analyze the efficacy of the low-daily dose and the pulsed doses of isotretinoin in treating mild-to-moderate acne patients with regards to response and relapse rates. Systematic review and meta-analysis using an electronic literature search were performed. The 320 potentially relevant articles were included and reviewed. The level of evidence is moderate to low as conducted by the GRADE quality of evidence assessment. The pooled statistical estimate for response to treatment in the group comparing low-daily doses with conventional dose showed an overall benefit for conventional dose. On the other hand, pooled data from the group comparing the low-daily dose with the pulsed doses yielded an overall beneficial effect from using the low-daily dose compared with the pulsed doses on achieving the response. Given all of the available studies, the quality of evidence is low. It appears that conventional dose isotretinoin improves the odds of prolonged remission in adults with mild-to-moderate acne vulgaris compared to the low doses.
Topics: Acne Vulgaris; Administration, Oral; Adult; Dermatologic Agents; Humans; Isotretinoin; Recurrence
PubMed: 35000295
DOI: 10.1111/dth.15311 -
Nutrients Mar 2022Lung cancer is one of the most common neoplasms globally, with about 2.2 million new cases and 1.8 million deaths annually. Although the most important factor in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Lung cancer is one of the most common neoplasms globally, with about 2.2 million new cases and 1.8 million deaths annually. Although the most important factor in reducing lung cancer risk is lifestyle change, most patients favour the use of supplements, for example, rather than quitting smoking or following a healthy diet. To better understand the efficacy of such interventions, a systematic review was performed of data from randomized controlled trials concerning the influence of beta-carotene supplementation on lung cancer risk in subjects with no lung cancer before the intervention. The search corpus comprised a number of databases and eight studies involving 167,141 participants, published by November 2021. The findings indicate that beta-carotene supplementation was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer (RR = 1.16, 95% CI = 1.06-1.26). This effect was even more noticeable among smokers and asbestos workers (RR = 1.21, 95% CI = 1.08-1.35) and non-medics (RR = 1.18, 95% CI = 1.07-1.29). A meta-regression found no relationship between the beta-carotene supplementation dose and the size of the negative effect associated with lung cancer risk. Our findings indicate that beta-carotene supplementation has no effect on lung cancer risk. Moreover, when used as the primary chemoprevention, beta-carotene may, in fact, increase the risk of lung cancer.
Topics: Antioxidants; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Smoking; beta Carotene
PubMed: 35405977
DOI: 10.3390/nu14071361 -
JAMA Jun 2022Cardiovascular disease and cancer are the 2 leading causes of death in the US, and vitamin and mineral supplementation has been proposed to help prevent these conditions.
Vitamin and Mineral Supplements for the Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease and Cancer: Updated Evidence Report and Systematic Review for the US Preventive Services Task Force.
IMPORTANCE
Cardiovascular disease and cancer are the 2 leading causes of death in the US, and vitamin and mineral supplementation has been proposed to help prevent these conditions.
OBJECTIVE
To review the benefits and harms of vitamin and mineral supplementation in healthy adults to prevent cardiovascular disease and cancer to inform the US Preventive Services Task Force.
DATA SOURCES
MEDLINE, PubMed (publisher-supplied records only), Cochrane Library, and Embase (January 2013 to February 1, 2022); prior reviews.
STUDY SELECTION
English-language randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of vitamin or mineral use among adults without cardiovascular disease or cancer and with no known vitamin or mineral deficiencies; observational cohort studies examining serious harms.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Single extraction, verified by a second reviewer. Quantitative pooling methods appropriate for rare events were used for most analyses.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Mortality, cardiovascular disease events, cancer incidence, serious harms.
RESULTS
Eighty-four studies (N=739 803) were included. In pooled analyses, multivitamin use was significantly associated with a lower incidence of any cancer (odds ratio [OR], 0.93 [95% CI, 0.87-0.99]; 4 RCTs [n=48 859]; absolute risk difference [ARD] range among adequately powered trials, -0.2% to -1.2%) and lung cancer (OR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.58-0.95]; 2 RCTs [n=36 052]; ARD, 0.2%). However, the evidence for multivitamins had important limitations. Beta carotene (with or without vitamin A) was significantly associated with an increased risk of lung cancer (OR, 1.20 [95% CI, 1.01-1.42]; 4 RCTs [n=94 830]; ARD range, -0.1% to 0.6%) and cardiovascular mortality (OR, 1.10 [95% CI, 1.02-1.19]; 5 RCTs [n=94 506] ARD range, -0.8% to 0.8%). Vitamin D use was not significantly associated with all-cause mortality (OR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.91-1.02]; 27 RCTs [n=117 082]), cardiovascular disease (eg, composite cardiovascular disease event outcome: OR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.95-1.05]; 7 RCTs [n=74 925]), or cancer outcomes (eg, any cancer incidence: OR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.92-1.03]; 19 RCTs [n=86 899]). Vitamin E was not significantly associated with all-cause mortality (OR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.97-1.07]; 9 RCTs [n=107 772]), cardiovascular disease events (OR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.90-1.04]; 4 RCTs [n=62 136]), or cancer incidence (OR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.98-1.08]; 5 RCTs [n=76 777]). Evidence for benefit of other supplements was equivocal, minimal, or absent. Limited evidence suggested some supplements may be associated with higher risk of serious harms (hip fracture [vitamin A], hemorrhagic stroke [vitamin E], and kidney stones [vitamin C, calcium]).
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Vitamin and mineral supplementation was associated with little or no benefit in preventing cancer, cardiovascular disease, and death, with the exception of a small benefit for cancer incidence with multivitamin use. Beta carotene was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer and other harmful outcomes in persons at high risk of lung cancer.
Topics: Adult; Advisory Committees; Cardiovascular Diseases; Dietary Supplements; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Minerals; Neoplasms; Primary Prevention; United States; Vitamin A; Vitamins; beta Carotene
PubMed: 35727272
DOI: 10.1001/jama.2021.15650 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2022Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) is a major public health problem in low- and middle-income countries, affecting 190 million children under five years of age and leading to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Vitamin A deficiency (VAD) is a major public health problem in low- and middle-income countries, affecting 190 million children under five years of age and leading to many adverse health consequences, including death. Based on prior evidence and a previous version of this review, the World Health Organization has continued to recommend vitamin A supplementation (VAS) for children aged 6 to 59 months. The last version of this review was published in 2017, and this is an updated version of that review.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effects of vitamin A supplementation (VAS) for preventing morbidity and mortality in children aged six months to five years.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, six other databases, and two trials registers up to March 2021. We also checked reference lists and contacted relevant organisations and researchers to identify additional studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and cluster-RCTs evaluating the effect of synthetic VAS in children aged six months to five years living in the community. We excluded studies involving children in hospital and children with disease or infection. We also excluded studies evaluating the effects of food fortification, consumption of vitamin A rich foods, or beta-carotene supplementation.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
For this update, two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion resolving discrepancies by discussion. We performed meta-analyses for outcomes, including all-cause and cause-specific mortality, disease, vision, and side effects. We used the GRADE approach to assess the quality of the evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
The updated search identified no new RCTs. We identified 47 studies, involving approximately 1,223,856 children. Studies were set in 19 countries: 30 (63%) in Asia, 16 of these in India; 8 (17%) in Africa; 7 (15%) in Latin America, and 2 (4%) in Australia. About one-third of the studies were in urban/periurban settings, and half were in rural settings; the remaining studies did not clearly report settings. Most studies included equal numbers of girls and boys and lasted about one year. The mean age of the children was about 33 months. The included studies were at variable overall risk of bias; however, evidence for the primary outcome was at low risk of bias. A meta-analysis for all-cause mortality included 19 trials (1,202,382 children). At longest follow-up, there was a 12% observed reduction in the risk of all-cause mortality for VAS compared with control using a fixed-effect model (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). Nine trials reported mortality due to diarrhoea and showed a 12% overall reduction for VAS (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.98; 1,098,538 children; high-certainty evidence). There was no evidence of a difference for VAS on mortality due to measles (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.11; 6 studies, 1,088,261 children; low-certainty evidence), respiratory disease (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.12; 9 studies, 1,098,538 children; low-certainty evidence), and meningitis. VAS reduced the incidence of diarrhoea (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.82 to 0.87; 15 studies, 77,946 children; low-certainty evidence), measles (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.67; 6 studies, 19,566 children; moderate-certainty evidence), Bitot's spots (RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.53; 5 studies, 1,063,278 children; moderate-certainty evidence), night blindness (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.50; 2 studies, 22,972 children; moderate-certainty evidence), and VAD (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.78; 4 studies, 2262 children, moderate-certainty evidence). However, there was no evidence of a difference on incidence of respiratory disease (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.06; 11 studies, 27,540 children; low-certainty evidence) or hospitalisations due to diarrhoea or pneumonia. There was an increased risk of vomiting within the first 48 hours of VAS (RR 1.97, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.69; 4 studies, 10,541 children; moderate-certainty evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
This update identified no new eligible studies and the conclusions remain the same. VAS is associated with a clinically meaningful reduction in morbidity and mortality in children. Further placebo-controlled trials of VAS in children between six months and five years of age would not change the conclusions of this review, although studies that compare different doses and delivery mechanisms are needed. In populations with documented VAD, it would be unethical to conduct placebo-controlled trials.
Topics: Child; Child, Preschool; Diarrhea; Dietary Supplements; Female; Humans; Male; Measles; Morbidity; Respiration Disorders; Vitamin A; Vitamin A Deficiency
PubMed: 35294044
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008524.pub4