1993
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1993.93
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Epithelial cell proliferation in the sigmoid colon of patients with adenomatous polyps increases during oral calcium supplementation

Abstract: Summary To study the effect of oral supplemental calcium on colonic epithelial proliferation, 17 adenomatous polyp patients received 1.5gCa2+ as calcium carbonate daily during 12 weeks, while on a calcium constant diet, based on the patients' habitual diet. Seven subsequently continued calcium supplementation for 9 months without dietary restrictions. Epithelial proliferation rate in colonic biopsies, expressed as labelling index (%), was determined with 5-bromodeoxyuridine and immunohistochemistry. Biopsies w… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
3

Year Published

1994
1994
2013
2013

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
8
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Whether the increase of fecal fat excretion might be harmful for the colonic epithelial cells and might thus induce in creased cell proliferation was not evaluated in this study, but this cannot be fully excluded. In this respect it is worth mentioning that although several investigators have found that oral calcium supplementation caused a lower ing of epithelial cell proliferation in the rec tum [23][24][25], this has not been confirmed in other studies [26,27] and we even found an increase of proliferative activity of the epithe lium in the sigmoid during calcium supple mentation [28], Whether these discrepancies are related to the effects of calcium on fatty acid excretion is only speculative.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 45%
“…Whether the increase of fecal fat excretion might be harmful for the colonic epithelial cells and might thus induce in creased cell proliferation was not evaluated in this study, but this cannot be fully excluded. In this respect it is worth mentioning that although several investigators have found that oral calcium supplementation caused a lower ing of epithelial cell proliferation in the rec tum [23][24][25], this has not been confirmed in other studies [26,27] and we even found an increase of proliferative activity of the epithe lium in the sigmoid during calcium supple mentation [28], Whether these discrepancies are related to the effects of calcium on fatty acid excretion is only speculative.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 45%
“…[21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] However, results of a number of international ecological and analytic epidemiologic studies did not support the hypothesis that calcium-deficient diet is a risk for colorectal cancer and did not find a cancer preventive value for calcium supplementation in humans. 11,13,14,16,22,26,31,32 These findings were in contrast to the findings of experimental studies in animals, where a calcium deficient or supplemented diet had a marked protective effect on large bowel epithelial proliferation and also on the process of carcinogenisis. 6,23,28 -30,33 Suppression of large bowel epithelial proliferation by calcium has been explained by intraluminal binding of bile and fatty acids to calcium that thereby reduces the damaging effects of bile and fatty acids on colonic epithelial cells and/or by the strengthening their intercellular bonds by calcium and/or by systemic strengthening through calcium and vitamin D metabolism.…”
contrasting
confidence: 56%
“…An inhibitory effect of 2.0 g of calcium daily has been demonstrated on the hyperproliferating epithelial cytokinetics, with no effect of 1.5 g [21]. Also, the stabilizing effect of calcium has mostly been observed in hyperproliferative rectal mucosa [18], whereas an increased labelling index was found in the sigmoid mucosa [66]. No difference in segmental polyp growth pattern or new polyp formation related to calcium and antioxidants was found in the present study.…”
Section: Discussioncontrasting
confidence: 36%