Investigating the Relationship between Cadmium Exposure and the Risk of Prostate Cancer: A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-Analysis

Abdollah  Mohammadian-Hafshejani; Parisa  Farahmandian; Abdolmajid  Fadaei; Ramezan  Sadeghi

doi:10.18502/ijph.v53i3.15136

Abdollah Mohammadian-Hafshejani Modeling in Health Research Center, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran
Parisa Farahmandian Student Research Committee, School of Health, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran
Abdolmajid Fadaei Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Health, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran
Ramezan Sadeghi Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Health, Shahrekord University of Medical Sciences, Shahrekord, Iran

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18502/ijph.v53i3.15136

Keywords: Cadmium; Prostate cancer; Systematic review; Dose-response meta-analysis

Abstract

Background: Cadmium, a toxic heavy metal, experienced a surge in production during the 20th century due to the rise of nickel-cadmium batteries, metal plating, and plastic stabilizers. Exposure to cadmium primarily occurs through the consumption of contaminated food, such as vegetables and grains, as well as drinking water or inhaling polluted air. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between cadmium exposure and the incidence of prostate cancer using a systematic review and meta-analysis approach.

Methods: This research involved searching and retrieving observational and experimental studies conducted until May 2022 from various databases, including ISI Web of Science, Cochrane, Science Direct, Scopus, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Data analysis was performed using Stata 15 statistical software.

Results: The initial search yielded 794 articles, which were subsequently reduced to 427 articles after eliminating duplicates. Following the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 16 studies were included in the meta-analysis. The odds ratio of prostate cancer compared to the first quartile of exposure in the second quartile was 1.03 (0.95-1.12), in the third quartile it was 1.12 (0.99-1.26) and in the fourth quartile of exposure was equal to 1.16 (0.79-1.70). Regarding the investigation of the probability of the occurrence of publication bias, the results of Begg's and Egger's tests were not statistically significant.

Conclusion: Although exposure to cadmium leads to an increase in the chance of prostate cancer, this chance increase was not statistically significant.