METHODS: We searched relevant studies in electronic databases. When two or more observational studies reported the same outcome measures, we performed pooled analysis. All the analyses were performed on PBL using PCR. The odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to assess the strength of association.
RESULTS: Seven studies (with 8 datasets) were included in this meta-analysis; 3 prospective studies, 3 retrospective studies and 1 study with a separate prospective and retrospective designs. The pooled analysis of 4 prospective studies (summary OR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.77-1.34, I (2):30%) and 4 retrospective studies (summary OR 1.65, 95% CI: 0.96-2.83, I (2):96%) showed no relationship between PBL telomere length and the CRC risk. A subgroup analysis of 2 prospective studies exclusively on females also showed no association between PBL telomere length and the CRC risk (summary OR, 1.17, 95% CI:0.72-1.91, I (2):57%).
CONCLUSION: The current analysis is insufficient to provide evidence on the relationship between PBL telomere length and the risk of CRC. Findings suggest that there may be a complex relationship between PBL telomere length and the CRC risk or discrepancy between genetics, age of patients and clinical studies. Future well powered, large prospective studies on the relationship between telomere length and the risk of CRC, and the investigations of the biologic mechanisms are recommended.