Use of glucosamine and chondroitin in relation to mortality

68Citations
Citations of this article
62Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Glucosamine and chondroitin are products commonly used by older adults in the US and Europe. There is limited evidence that they have anti-inflammatory properties, which could provide risk reduction of several diseases. However, data on their long-term health effects is lacking. To evaluate whether use of glucosamine and chondroitin are associated with cause-specific and total mortality. Participants (n = 77,510) were members of a cohort study of Washington State (US) residents aged 50-76 years who entered the cohort in 2000-2002 by completing a baseline questionnaire that included questions on glucosamine and chondroitin use. Participants were followed for mortality through 2008 (n = 5,362 deaths). Hazard ratios (HR) for death adjusted for multiple covariates were estimated using Cox models. Current (baseline) glucosamine and chondroitin use were associated with a decreased risk of total mortality compared to never use. The adjusted HR associated with current use of glucosamine (with or without chondroitin) was 0.82 (95 % CI 0.75-0.90) and 0.86 (95 % CI 0.78-0.96) for chondroitin (included in two-thirds of glucosamine supplements). Current use of glucosamine was associated with a significant decreased risk of death from cancer (HR 0.87 95 % CI 0.76-0.98) and with a large risk reduction for death from respiratory diseases (HR 0.59 95 % CI 0.41-0.83). Use of glucosamine with or without chondroitin was associated with reduced total mortality and with reductions of several broad causes of death. Although bias cannot be ruled out, these results suggest that glucosamine may provide some mortality benefit. © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Bell, G. A., Kantor, E. D., Lampe, J. W., Shen, D. D., & White, E. (2012). Use of glucosamine and chondroitin in relation to mortality. European Journal of Epidemiology, 27(8), 593–603. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-012-9714-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free