Skip to main content
. 2014 Oct;6(4):177–185.

Table 2 . Randomized trials of Zn and esophageal cancer .

Author Year country population men Mean age Zn form (dose mg) Other vitamins or minerals combined with Zinc No of subjects Factorial design Placebo controlled/ Double blind Intervention
period
Follow up
After trial
Outcomes Relative risk Quality score 1
Wang 40 2013 China Patients with dysplasia 44 54 Zn sulfate (45) 14 vitamins & 12 minerals/ daily 3318 No Yes 6 y 20 y Total mortality/ Total cancer mortality/ EC mortality No effect 4
2Qiao41 2009 China Residents in Linxian 45 52 at start Zn oxide (22.5) 5000IU retinol palmitate/ daily 29584 Yes Yes 5.25 y 10 y Total mortality/ Total cancer mortality/ EC mortality Increased total and stroke mortality 4
Taylor 42 1995 China Patients with dysplasia 44 54 Zn sulfate (45) 14 vitamins & 12 minerals/ daily 396 No Yes 30 mo 0 Reversion to non-dysplasia 1.26 (1.06-1.46)/ p=0.005 4
72 mo 0 Reversion to non-dysplasia 1.21 (1.02-1.40) / p=0.02
Zhang43 1995 China Residents in Linxian/ Patients with dysplasia 45/ 44 52/ 54 Zn oxide (22.5) / Zn sulfate (45) 14 vitamins & 12 minerals/ daily 400 /375 Yes Yes 5.25 y/6 y 0 T cell response No effect 4
Taylor 44 1994 China Rencun commune 50 48 at start Zn oxide (22.5) 5000IU retinol palmitate/ daily 391 Yes Yes 5.25 y 0 Prevalence of esophageal  cancer OR=1.02 (0.36-2.91) 4
Prevalence of esophageal  dysplasia or cancer OR= 1.12
(0.57-2.20)
Rao 45 1994 China Patients with dysplasia 42 57 Zn sulfate (45) 14 vitamins & 12 minerals/ daily 512 No Yes 30 mo 0 Overall amount of proliferation p>0.05 4
Lower epithelial level p>0.05
Wahrendorf 46 1988 China Residents in Huixian 50 35-64 Zn (50 ) / weekly 50000IU retinol, 200mg riboflavin/ weekly 610 No Yes 13.5 mo 0 Prevalence of precancerous lesions OR=0.78,
p=0.05
3
Munoz 47 1987 China Residents in Huixian 50 35-64 Zn (50 ) / weekly 50000IU retinol, 200mg riboflavin/ weekly 170 No Yes 13.5 mo 0 Prevalence of micronuclei in esophageal cells OR=0.61,
p=0.04
3

1 Quality score ranges from 0 (worst quality) to 5 (best quality), based on criteria by Jadad et al.

2 The references40,42,43,45 and 41,44 and 46,47 are different outcomes from the same study.