Lifestyle factors and colorectal cancer risk (2): a systematic review and meta-analysis of associations with leisure-time physical activity.

OBJECTIVE: Increased physical activity may decrease the risk of colorectal cancer. As a prerequisite to the determination of lifestyle attributable risks, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies to quantify gender-specific risk associated with increased leisure-time physical activity (LT-PA). METHOD: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (to December 2007), and other sources, selecting reports based on strict inclusion criteria. We used random-effects meta-analyses to estimate summary risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for uppermost vs lowermost categories of physical activity. To investigate dose-response, we explored risks ratios as a function of cumulative percentiles of physical activity distribution. RESULTS: Fifteen datasets from 14 articles, including 7873 incident cases, were identified. For colon cancer, there were inverse associations with LT-PA for men (RR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.67-0.96) and women (0.86; 0.76-0.98). LT-PA did not influence risk of rectal cancer. The dose-response analysis was consistent with linear pattern reductions in risk of colon cancer in both genders. There was evidence of moderate between-study heterogeneity but summary estimates were broadly consistent across potential confounding factors. CONCLUSION: Increased LT-PA is associated with a modest reduction in colon but not rectal cancer risk; a risk reduction, which previously may have been overstated. LT-PA only interventions in public health cancer prevention strategies are unlikely to impact substantially on colorectal cancer incidences.

Lifestyle factors and colorectal cancer risk (1): systematic review and meta-analysis of associations with body mass index.

OBJECTIVE: Excess body weight, defined by body mass index (BMI), may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. As a prerequisite to the determination of lifestyle attributable risks, we undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies to quantify colorectal cancer risk associated with increased BMI and explore for differences by gender, sub-site and study characteristics. METHOD: We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE (to December 2007), and other sources, selecting reports based on strict inclusion criteria. Random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions of study-specific incremental estimates were performed to determine the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) associated with a 5 kg/m(2) increase in BMI. RESULTS: We analysed 29 datasets from 28 articles, including 67,361 incident cases. Higher BMI was associated with colon (RR 1.24, 95% CIs: 1.20-1.28) and rectal (1.09, 1.05-1.14) cancers in men, and with colon cancer (1.09, 1.04-1.12) in women. Associations were stronger in men than in women for colon (P < 0.001) and rectal (P = 0.005) cancers. Associations were generally consistent across geographic populations. Study characteristics and adjustments accounted for only moderate variations of associations. CONCLUSION: Increasing BMI is associated with a modest increased risk of developing colon and rectal cancers, but this modest risk may translate to large attributable proportions in high-prevalence obese populations. Inter-gender differences point to potentially important mechanistic differences, which merit further research.