Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from BMC Cancer and BioMed Central.

Open Access Research article

Arachidonic acid and cancer risk: a systematic review of observational studies

Mai Sakai12*, Saki Kakutani13, Chika Horikawa3, Hisanori Tokuda3, Hiroshi Kawashima3, Hiroshi Shibata23, Hitomi Okubo1 and Satoshi Sasaki1

Author Affiliations

1 Department of Social and Preventive Epidemiology, School of Public Health, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

2 Quality Assurance Department, Suntory Wellness Limited, Tokyo, Japan

3 Institute for Health Care Science, Suntory Wellness Limited, Osaka, Japan

For all author emails, please log on.

BMC Cancer 2012, 12:606  doi:10.1186/1471-2407-12-606

Published: 19 December 2012

Abstract

Background

An n-6 essential fatty acid, arachidonic acid (ARA) is converted into prostaglandin E2, which is involved in tumour extension. However, it is unclear whether dietary ARA intake leads to cancer in humans. We thus systematically evaluated available observational studies on the relationship between ARA exposure and the risk of colorectal, skin, breast, prostate, lung, and stomach cancers.

Methods

We searched the PubMed database for articles published up to May 17, 2010. 126 potentially relevant articles from the initial search and 49,670 bibliographies were scrutinised to identify eligible publications by using predefined inclusion criteria. A comprehensive literature search yielded 52 eligible articles, and their reporting quality and methodological quality was assessed. Information on the strength of the association between ARA exposure and cancer risk, the dose-response relationship, and methodological limitations was collected and evaluated with respect to consistency and study design.

Results

For colorectal, skin, breast, and prostate cancer, 17, 3, 18, and 16 studies, respectively, were identified. We could not obtain eligible reports for lung and stomach cancer. Studies used cohort (n = 4), nested case-control (n = 12), case-control (n = 26), and cross-sectional (n = 12) designs. The number of subjects (n = 15 - 88,795), ARA exposure assessment method (dietary intake or biomarker), cancer diagnosis and patient recruitment procedure (histological diagnosis, cancer registries, or self-reported information) varied among studies. The relationship between ARA exposure and colorectal cancer was inconsistent based on ARA exposure assessment methodology (dietary intake or biomarker). Conversely, there was no strong positive association or dose-response relationship for breast or prostate cancer. There were limited numbers of studies on skin cancer to draw any conclusions from the results.

Conclusions

The available epidemiologic evidence is weak because of the limited number of studies and their methodological limitations, but nonetheless, the results suggest that ARA exposure is not associated with increased breast and prostate cancer risk. Further evidence from well-designed observational studies is required to confirm or refute the association between ARA exposure and risk of cancer.