Dairy foods and body mass index over 10-year: evidence from the Caerphilly Prospective Cohort Study

The association between dairy product consumption and body mass index (BMI) remains controversial. The aim of the present study was to investigate the association between total dairy, milk, cheese, cream and butter consumption and BMI change over a 10-year follow-up by using long-term follow-up cohort data from the Caerphilly Prospective Cohort Study (CAPS). The CAPS included 2512 men aged 45⁻59 years at baseline, who were followed up at 5-year intervals for over 20-year. A semi-quantitative food frequency questionnaire estimated the intake of dairy consumption, including milk, cheese, cream and butter at baseline, 5-year and 10-year follow-up. In total, men free of cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer ( = 1690) were included in current analysis. General linear regression and logistic regression were used for data analysis. The results showed higher cheese consumption was associated with lower BMI at the 5-year follow-up ( = 0.013). There was no evidence that higher consumption of total dairy, milk, cream and butter were significantly associated with BMI during the over the 10-year following-up. This study suggest that cheese consumption have beneficial effects on lowering BMI, which needs further investigation

Dairy foods and body mass index over 20-years: evidence from Caerphilly Prospective Study

The prevalence of obesity has reached epidemic proportions with more than 600 million adults worldwide classified as clinically obese (body mass index (BMI) ⩾ 30 kg/m2)(1). Among the various approaches to tackle obesity and its comorbidities, a heathy diet is one of the key determinants for reducing obesity(2). Given that dairy products are naturally rich in protein and essential micronutrients, including calcium, potassium and vitamin A(3), they are recommended as an integral part of a healthy diet by many countries(4). However, dairy is also a major contributor to saturated fatty acids (SFA) and energy intake(5), thus their role in development of obes- ity has been questioned and explored by several studies(6). We investigated the association between total dairy, milk, cheese, cream and butter consumption and BMI change over a 20-year follow-up using the Caerphilly prospective study (CAPS). The CAPS included 2512 men aged 45–59 years, who were followed up at 5-year intervals for over 20-years. The associations of total dairy, milk, cheese, cream and butter consumption with BMI were examined cross-sectionally at baseline and longitudinally at 5, 10, 15 and 20-years follow-ups. General linear regression and logistic regression were used for data analysis. Men free of cardiovascular disease and diabetes (n = 1704) were included in the current analysis. Higher cheese consumption was associated with lower BMI at the 5-year follow-up (P = 0·008) but not at later follow-ups. There was no evidence that higher consumption of dairy products was associated with increased BMI during the over 20-years follow-up, although total dairy (P = 0·002) and milk consumption (P < 0·001) were inversely associated with BMI at baseline. For the future studies, the association between cheese consumption and BMI requires further investigation

Aspirin and cancer survival: a systematic review and meta-analyses of 118 observational studies of aspirin and 18 cancers.

BackgroundDespite the accumulation of research papers on aspirin and cancer, there is doubt as to whether or not aspirin is an acceptable and effective adjunct treatment of cancer. The results of several randomised trials are awaited, and these should give clear evidence on three common cancers: colon, breast and prostate. The biological effects of aspirin appear likely however to be of relevance to cancer generally, and to metastatic spread, rather than just to one or a few cancers, and there is already a lot of evidence, mainly from observational studies, on the association between aspirin and survival in a wide range of cancers.AimsIn order to test the hypothesis that aspirin taking is associated with an increase in the survival of patients with cancer, we conducted a series of systematic literature searches to identify clinical studies of patients with cancer, some of whom took aspirin after having received a diagnosis of cancer.ResultsThree literature searches identified 118 published observational studies in patients with 18 different cancers. Eighty-one studies report on aspirin and cancer mortality and 63 studies report on all-cause mortality. Within a total of about a quarter of a million patients with cancer who reported taking aspirin, representing 20%-25% of the total cohort, we found aspirin to be associated with a reduction of about 20% in cancer deaths (pooled hazard ratio (HR): 0.79; 95% confidence intervals: 0.73, 0.84 in 70 reports and a pooled odds ratio (OR): 0.67; 0.45, 1.00 in 11 reports) with similar reductions in all-cause mortality (HR: 0.80; 0.74, 0.86 in 56 studies and OR: 0.57; 0.36, 0.89 in seven studies). The relative safety of aspirin taking was examined in the studies and the corresponding author of every paper was written to asking for additional information on bleeding. As expected, the frequency of bleeding increased in the patients taking aspirin, but fatal bleeding was rare and no author reported a significant excess in fatal bleeds associated with aspirin. No author mentioned cerebral bleeding in the patients they had followed.ConclusionsThere is a considerable body of evidence suggestive of about a 20% reduction in mortality in patients with cancer who take aspirin, and the benefit appears not to be restricted to one or a few cancers. Aspirin, therefore, appears to deserve serious consideration as an adjuvant treatment of cancer, and patients with cancer, and their carers, have a right to be informed of the available evidence

Healthy living and cancer: evidence from UK Biobank.

CONTEXT: UK Biobank is a prospective study of half a million subjects, almost all aged 40-69 years, identified in 22 centres across the UK during 2006-2010. OBJECTIVE: A healthy lifestyle has been described as 'better than any pill, and no side effects [5]. We therefore examined the relationships between healthy behaviours: low alcohol intake, non-smoking, healthy BMI, physical activity and a healthy diet, and the risk of all cancers, colon, breast and prostate cancers in a large dataset. METHOD: Data on lifestyle behaviours were provided by 343,150 subjects, and height and weight were measured at recruitment. 14,285 subjects were diagnosed with cancer during a median of 5.1 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Compared with subjects who followed none or a single healthy behaviour, a healthy lifestyle based on all five behaviours was associated with a reduction of about one-third in incident cancer (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68; 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.63-0.74). Colorectal cancer was reduced in subjects following the five behaviours by about one-quarter (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.58-0.97), and breast cancer by about one-third (HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.52-0.83). The association between a healthy lifestyle and prostate cancer suggested a significant increase in risk, but this can be attributed to bias consequent on inequalities in the uptake of the prostate specific antigen screening test. CONCLUSIONS: Taken together with reported reductions in diabetes, vascular disease and dementia, it is clearly important that every effort is taken to promote healthy lifestyles throughout the population, and it is pointed out that cancer and other screening clinics afford 'teachable moments' for the promotion of a healthy lifestyle

Systematic review update of observational studies further supports aspirin role in cancer treatment: Time to share evidence and decision-making with patients?

BACKGROUND: Evidence is growing that low-dose aspirin used as an adjuvant treatment of cancer is associated with an increased survival and a reduction in metastatic spread. We therefore extended up to August 2017 an earlier systematic search and meta-analyses of published studies of low-dose aspirin taken by patients with a diagnosis of cancer. METHODS: Searches were completed in Medline and Embase to August 2017 using a pre-defined search strategy to identify reports of relevant studies. References in all the selected papers were scanned. Two reviewers independently applied pre-determined eligibility criteria and extracted data on cause-specific cancer deaths, overall mortality and the occurrence of metastatic spread. Meta-analyses were then conducted for different cancers and heterogeneity and publication bias assessed. Sensitivity analyses and attempts to reduce heterogeneity were conducted. RESULTS: Analyses of 29 studies reported since an earlier review up to April 2015 are presented in this report, and these are then pooled with the 42 studies in our earlier publication. Overall meta-analyses of the 71 studies are presented, based on a total of over 120 thousand patients taking aspirin. Ten of the studies also give evidence on the incidence of metastatic cancer spread. There are now twenty-nine observational studies describing colorectal cancer (CRC) and post-diagnostic aspirin. Pooling the estimates of reduction by aspirin which are reported as hazard ratios (HR), gives an overall HR for aspirin and CRC mortality 0.72 (95% CI 0.64-0.80). Fourteen observational studies have reported on aspirin and breast cancer mortality and pooling those that report the association with aspirin as a hazard ratio gives HR 0.69 (0.53-0.90). Sixteen studies report on aspirin and prostate cancer mortality and a pooled estimate yields an HR of 0.87 (95% CI 0.73-1.05). Data from 12 reports relating to other cancers are also listed. Ten studies give evidence of a reduction in metastatic spread; four give a pooled HR 0.31 (95% CI 0.18, 0.54) and five studies which reported odds ratio of metastatic spread give OR 0.79 (0.66 to 0.95). CONCLUSION: Being almost entirely from observational studies, the evidence of benefit from aspirin is limited. There is heterogeneity between studies and the results are subject to important biases, only some of which can be identified. Nevertheless, the evidence would seem to merit wide discussion regarding whether or not it is adequate to justify the recommendation of low-dose therapeutic aspirin, and if it is, for which cancers

Global avian influenza surveillance in wild birds: A strategy to capture viral diversity

Wild birds play a major role in the evolution, maintenance, and spread of avian influenza viruses. However, surveillance for these viruses in wild birds is sporadic, geographically biased, and often limited to the last outbreak virus. To identify opportunities to optimize wild bird surveillance for understanding viral diversity, we reviewed responses to a World Organisation for Animal Health-administered survey, government reports to this organization, articles on Web of Knowledge, and the Influenza Research Database. At least 119 countries conducted avian influenza virus surveillance in wild birds during 2008-2013, but coordination and standardization was lacking among surveillance efforts, and most focused on limited subsets of influenza viruses. Given high financial and public health burdens of recent avian influenza outbreaks, we call for sustained, cost-effective investments in locations with high avian influenza diversity in wild birds and efforts to promote standardized sampling, testing, and reporting methods, including full-genome sequencing. (Résumé d'auteur

Aspirin in the Treatment of Cancer: Reductions in Metastatic Spread and in Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of Published Studies.

BACKGROUND: Low-dose aspirin has been shown to reduce the incidence of cancer, but its role in the treatment of cancer is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: We conducted a systematic search of the scientific literature on aspirin taken by patients following a diagnosis of cancer, together with appropriate meta-analyses. METHODS: Searches were completed in Medline and Embase in December 2015 using a pre-defined search strategy. References and abstracts of all the selected papers were scanned and expert colleagues were contacted for additional studies. Two reviewers applied pre-determined eligibility criteria (cross-sectional, cohort and controlled studies, and aspirin taken after a diagnosis of cancer), assessed study quality and extracted data on cancer cause-specific deaths, overall mortality and incidence of metastases. Random effects meta-analyses and planned sub-group analyses were completed separately for observational and experimental studies. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed in sensitivity analyses and appropriate omissions made. Papers were examined for any reference to bleeding and authors of the papers were contacted and questioned. RESULTS: Five reports of randomised trials were identified, together with forty two observational studies: sixteen on colorectal cancer, ten on breast and ten on prostate cancer mortality. Pooling of eleven observational reports of the effect of aspirin on cause-specific mortality from colon cancer, after the omission of one report identified on the basis of sensitivity analyses, gave a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.76 (95% CI 0.66, 0.88) with reduced heterogeneity (P = 0.04). The cause specific mortality in five reports of patients with breast cancer showed significant heterogeneity (P<0.0005) but the omission of one outlying study reduced heterogeneity (P = 0.19) and led to an HR = 0.87 (95% CI 0.69, 1.09). Heterogeneity between nine studies of prostate cancer was significant, but again, the omission of one study led to acceptable homogeneity (P = 0.26) and an overall HR = 0.89 (95% CI 0.79-0.99). Six single studies of other cancers suggested reductions in cause specific mortality by aspirin, and in five the effect is statistically significant. There were no significant differences between the pooled HRs for the three main cancers and after the omission of three reports already identified in sensitivity analyses heterogeneity was removed and revealed an overall HR of 0.83 (95% CI 0.76-0.90). A mutation of PIK3CA was present in about 20% of patients, and appeared to explain most of the reduction in colon cancer mortality by aspirin. Data were not adequate to examine the importance of this or any other marker in the effect of aspirin in the other cancers. On bleeding attributable to aspirin two reports stated that there had been no side effect or bleeding attributable to aspirin. Authors on the other reports were written to and 21 replied stating that no data on bleeding were available. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: The study highlights the need for randomised trials of aspirin treatment in a variety of cancers. While these are awaited there is an urgent need for evidence from observational studies of aspirin and the less common cancers, and for more evidence of the relevance of possible bio-markers of the aspirin effect on a wide variety of cancers. In the meantime it is urged that patients in whom a cancer is diagnosed should be given details of this research, together with its limitations, to enable each to make an informed decision as to whether or not to take low-dose aspirin. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL NUMBER: CRD42015014145

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomised Trials to Ascertain Fatal Gastrointestinal Bleeding Events Attributable to Preventive Low-Dose Aspirin: No Evidence of Increased Risk.

BACKGROUND: Aspirin has been shown to lower the incidence and the mortality of vascular disease and cancer but its wider adoption appears to be seriously impeded by concerns about gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding. Unlike heart attacks, stroke and cancer, GI bleeding is an acute event, usually followed by complete recovery. We propose therefore that a more appropriate evaluation of the risk-benefit balance would be based on fatal adverse events, rather than on the incidence of bleeding. We therefore present a literature search and meta-analysis to ascertain fatal events attributable to low-dose aspirin. METHODS: In a systematic literature review we identified reports of randomised controlled trials of aspirin in which both total GI bleeding events and bleeds that led to death had been reported. Principal investigators of studies in which fatal events had not been adequately described were contacted via email and asked for further details. A meta-analyses was then performed to estimate the risk of fatal gastrointestinal bleeding attributable to low-dose aspirin. RESULTS: Eleven randomised trials were identified in the literature search. In these the relative risk (RR) of 'major' incident GI bleeding in subjects who had been randomised to low-dose aspirin was 1.55 (95% CI 1.33, 1.83), and the risk of a bleed attributable to aspirin being fatal was 0.45 (95% CI 0.25, 0.80). In all the subjects randomised to aspirin, compared with those randomised not to receive aspirin, there was no significant increase in the risk of a fatal bleed (RR 0.77; 95% CI 0.41, 1.43). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of the adverse events caused by aspirin are GI bleeds, and there appears to be no valid evidence that the overall frequency of fatal GI bleeds is increased by aspirin. The substantive risk for prophylactic aspirin is therefore cerebral haemorrhage which can be fatal or severely disabling, with an estimated risk of one death and one disabling stroke for every 1,000 people taking aspirin for ten years. These adverse effects of aspirin should be weighed against the reductions in vascular disease and cancer

Better than any pill - and no side effects! Healthy lifestyles, statins and aspirin

Behaviors which are associated with the preservation of health include nonsmoking, regular exercise, a low body weight, a healthy diet, and a low alcohol intake. Together, as a healthy lifestyle, these have been shown to be associated with marked protection against a wide range of diseases: diabetes, vascular disease, cancer, and dementia. On the other hand, the protection associated with statins and aspirin, the two most commonly used preventive drugs, is limited to vascular disease and, probably for aspirin, cancer. These are not alternative prophylactics and any two, or all three—a healthy lifestyle, a statin, and aspirin—can reasonably be taken together. Only a small proportion of the members of the community follow a healthy lifestyle. Yet a small increase in the uptake of the healthy behaviors throughout the community can be shown to have relatively large effects on the incidence of disease. There is therefore an urgent need for health promotion activities across the whole community to be greatly increased and for new challenging and encouraging strategies to be devised and tested