This is first meta-analysis to evaluate cancer risk associated with secondhand smoking across all cancers. A literature search was conducted for articles published before June 2014 on Pubmed, SCOPUS, Cochrane library, and CINAHL, and 40 articles on secondhand smoke and the prevalence of cancer among never smokers were selected for final analysis as per the inclusion criteria. Of the 40 articles, 27 were case-control studies and 13 were prospective cohort studies. With respect to overall cancer risk, odds ratio (OR) involving never smokers with significant exposure to secondhand smoke compared to never smokers without such exposure was 1.163 (95%CI 1.058–1.279). Subgroup meta-analyses by study design showed significant positive associations for both case-control studies and prospective cohort studies (OR 1.165, 95%CI 1.029–1.320; and OR 1.160, 95%CI 1.002–1.343, respectively). The association was stronger in the case of females (OR 1.253, 95%CI 1.142–1.374), lung cancer (OR 1.245, 95%CI 1.026–1.511), and breast cancer (OR 1.235, 95%CI 1.102–1.385). Secondhand smoking may increase the overall risk of cancer for never smokers, particularly lung and breast cancer, and especially in women. Strict implementation of smoking cessation programs should be encouraged, not only to reduce active smoking but also to limit exposure to secondhand smoke.

Jin MJ, et al. Korean J Fam Med. 2016 Mar;37(2):111-116. http://dx.doi.org/10.4082/kjfm.2016.37.2.111

Systemic inflammatory biomarkers have begun to be used in clinical practice to predict prognosis and survival of cancer patients, but the approach remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis to determine the predictive value of the c-reactive protein (CRP), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and Glasgow prognostic score (GPS)/modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS) in the clinical outcome of gastric cancer (GC) patients. We searched literature databases to identify relevant studies. All articles identified in the search were independently reviewed based on predetermined selection criteria. Meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of overall survival of the included studies. A total of 41 eligible cohort studies, involving a total of 18,348 patients meeting the inclusion criteria, were considered for meta-analysis. Increases in CRP (HR = 1.654, 95% CI: 1.272–2.151), NLR (HR = 1.605, 95% CI: 1.449–1.779), and GPS/mGPS (HR = 1.648, 95% CI: 1.351–2.011) were significantly associated with poorer survival in patients with GC. Substantial heterogeneities were noted in all three markers (I² = 86.479%, 50.799%, 69.774%, in CRP, NLR, and GPS/mGPS, respectively). Subgroup analysis revealed a significant positive correlation between each marker and poor survival, regardless of country, study quality, cancer stage, study design, or the inclusion of patients undergoing chemotherapy. This meta-analysis demonstrates that CRP, NLR, and GPS/mGPS are associated with poor survival in patients with GC. Further prospective studies using standardized measurements are warranted to conclude the prognostic value of various inflammatory markers.

Background: There is evidence that animal-assisted therapy has positive effects on mental health, especially in elderly people. Caring for insects is easy, relatively inexpensive, and does not require much space. Objective: The aim of this 8-week randomized, controlled, single-blinded study was to investigate the effect of pet insects on the psychological health of community-dwelling elderly people. Methods: Elderly subjects (≥65 years old) attending a community center in Daegu, Korea, were enrolled in the study between April and May 2014 and randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive insect therapy and health advice or only health advice. The insect group received 5 crickets in a cage with sufficient fodder and a detailed instruction manual. At baseline and at 8 weeks, all subjects underwent psychometric tests via a direct interview [Beck Anxiety Inventory, Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, Insomnia Severity Index, Fatigue Severity Scale, and Brief Encounter Psychosocial Instrument] and laboratory analyses of inflammatory and oxidative stress markers (erythrocyte sedimentation rate, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, biological antioxidant potential, and derivatives of reactive oxygen metabolites). Results: The insect-caring (n = 46) and control (n = 48) groups did not differ in baseline characteristics. The insect-caring group had significantly lower GDS-15 scores at week 8 (3.20 vs. 4.90, p = 0.004) and, after adjustment for baseline values, a significantly greater change in GDS-15 scores relative to baseline (-1.12 vs. 0.20, p = 0.011). They also had a significantly greater change in MMSE scores relative to baseline (1.13 vs. 0.31, p = 0.045). The two groups did not differ in terms of other psychometric and laboratory tests. No serious risks or adverse events were reported. Conclusion: Caring for insects, which is cost-effective and safe, was associated with a small to medium positive effect on depression and cognitive function in community-dwelling elderly people.

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between dietary magnesium and the risk of overall cancer using a meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Review through November 2012. All the articles searched were independently reviewed by 3 authors based on predetermined selection criterion. A total of 13 epidemiologic studies, 6 case-control studies, and 7 prospective cohort studies involving 1,236,004 participants were included in the final analysis. When all studies were pooled, the relative risk (RR) of overall cancer for the highest level of dietary magnesium intake was 0.801 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.664–0.966) compared with the lowest level of dietary magnesium intake. In subgroup meta-analyses by study design, there was a significant inverse association between dietary magnesium and the risk of cancer in case-control studies (RR = 0.663, 95% CI: 0.475–0.925), whereas there was no significant association in prospective cohort studies (RR = 0.888, 95% CI: 0.745–1.060). Furthermore, there was a significant preventive effect of dietary magnesium for colorectal cancer (RR = 0.775, 95% CI: 0.655–0.919), but not for other cancer. Our meta-analysis showed that higher dietary magnesium intake seems to have a protective effect for cancer, especially colorectal cancer and in females.