Evidence Hub

Calcium intake, calcium supplementation and cardiovascular disease and mortality in the British population: EPIC-norfolk prospective cohort study and meta-analysis

T. Pana, M. Dehghani, H. Baradaran, S. Neal, A. D. Wood, Chun S. Kwok, Y. Loke, R. Luben et al.

European Journal of Epidemiology, 2020

17,968 participants · 34 citations

Abstract

The role of dietary calcium in cardiovascular disease prevention is unclear. We aimed to determine the association between calcium intake and incident cardiovascular disease and mortality. Data were extracted from the European Prospective Investigation of Cancer, Norfolk (EPIC-Norfolk). Multivariable Cox regressions analysed associations between calcium intake (dietary and supplemental) and cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, aortic stenosis, peripheral vascular disease) and mortality (cardiovascular and all-cause). The results of this study were pooled with those from published prospective cohort studies in a meta-analsyis, stratifying by average calcium intake using a 700 mg/day threshold. A total of 17,968 participants aged 40–79 years were followed up for a median of 20.36 years (20.32–20.38). Compared to the first quintile of calcium intake (< 770 mg/day), intakes between 771 and 926 mg/day (second quintile) and 1074–1254 mg/day (fourth quintile) were associated with reduced all-cause mortality (HR 0.91 (0.83–0.99) and 0.85 (0.77–0.93), respectively) and cardiovascular mortality [HR 0.95 (0.87–1.04) and 0.93 (0.83-1.04)]. Compared to the first quintile of calcium intake, second, third, fourth, but not fifth quintiles were associated with fewer incident strokes: respective HR 0.84 (0.72–0.97), 0.83 (0.71–0.97), 0.78 (0.66–0.92) and 0.95 (0.78–1.15). The meta-analysis results suggest that high levels of calcium intake were associated with…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 17,968 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free