-
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) Dec 2022Mammographic density is a well-defined risk factor for breast cancer and having extremely dense breast tissue is associated with a one-to six-fold increased risk of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Mammographic density is a well-defined risk factor for breast cancer and having extremely dense breast tissue is associated with a one-to six-fold increased risk of breast cancer. However, it is questioned whether this increased risk estimate is applicable to current breast density classification methods. Therefore, the aim of this study was to further investigate and clarify the association between mammographic density and breast cancer risk based on current literature.
METHODS
Medline, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched for articles published since 2013, that used BI-RADS lexicon 5th edition and incorporated data on digital mammography. Crude and maximally confounder-adjusted data were pooled in odds ratios (ORs) using random-effects models. Heterogeneity regarding breast cancer risks were investigated using I statistic, stratified and sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS
Nine observational studies were included. Having extremely dense breast tissue (BI-RADS density D) resulted in a 2.11-fold (95% CI 1.84-2.42) increased breast cancer risk compared to having scattered dense breast tissue (BI-RADS density B). Sensitivity analysis showed that when only using data that had adjusted for age and BMI, the breast cancer risk was 1.83-fold (95% CI 1.52-2.21) increased. Both results were statistically significant and homogenous.
CONCLUSIONS
Mammographic breast density BI-RADS D is associated with an approximately two-fold increased risk of breast cancer compared to having BI-RADS density B in general population women. This is a novel and lower risk estimate compared to previously reported and might be explained due to the use of digital mammography and BI-RADS lexicon 5th edition.
Topics: Female; Humans; Breast Density; Breast Neoplasms; Mammography; Breast; Risk Factors
PubMed: 36183671
DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2022.09.007 -
CA: a Cancer Journal For Clinicians 2016Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The purpose of the American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline is to... (Review)
Review
Answer questions and earn CME/CNE The purpose of the American Cancer Society/American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline is to provide recommendations to assist primary care and other clinicians in the care of female adult survivors of breast cancer. A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PubMed through April 2015. A multidisciplinary expert workgroup with expertise in primary care, gynecology, surgical oncology, medical oncology, radiation oncology, and nursing was formed and tasked with drafting the Breast Cancer Survivorship Care Guideline. A total of 1073 articles met inclusion criteria; and, after full text review, 237 were included as the evidence base. Patients should undergo regular surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, including evaluation with a cancer-related history and physical examination, and should be screened for new primary breast cancer. Data do not support performing routine laboratory tests or imaging tests in asymptomatic patients to evaluate for breast cancer recurrence. Primary care clinicians should counsel patients about the importance of maintaining a healthy lifestyle, monitor for post-treatment symptoms that can adversely affect quality of life, and monitor for adherence to endocrine therapy. Recommendations provided in this guideline are based on current evidence in the literature and expert consensus opinion. Most of the evidence is not sufficient to warrant a strong evidence-based recommendation. Recommendations on surveillance for breast cancer recurrence, screening for second primary cancers, assessment and management of physical and psychosocial long-term and late effects of breast cancer and its treatment, health promotion, and care coordination/practice implications are made.
Topics: Adult; Aged; American Cancer Society; Body Image; Breast Neoplasms; Early Detection of Cancer; Female; Genetic Counseling; Humans; Medical History Taking; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Neoplasms, Second Primary; Physical Examination; Quality of Life; Risk Assessment; Survivors; United States; Young Adult
PubMed: 26641959
DOI: 10.3322/caac.21319 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Aug 2016To quantify the dose-response associations between total physical activity and risk of breast cancer, colon cancer, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and ischemic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Physical activity and risk of breast cancer, colon cancer, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and ischemic stroke events: systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013.
OBJECTIVE
To quantify the dose-response associations between total physical activity and risk of breast cancer, colon cancer, diabetes, ischemic heart disease, and ischemic stroke events.
DESIGN
Systematic review and Bayesian dose-response meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Embase from 1980 to 27 February 2016, and references from relevant systematic reviews. Data from the Study on Global AGEing and Adult Health conducted in China, Ghana, India, Mexico, Russia, and South Africa from 2007 to 2010 and the US National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys from 1999 to 2011 were used to map domain specific physical activity (reported in included studies) to total activity.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Prospective cohort studies examining the associations between physical activity (any domain) and at least one of the five diseases studied.
RESULTS
174 articles were identified: 35 for breast cancer, 19 for colon cancer, 55 for diabetes, 43 for ischemic heart disease, and 26 for ischemic stroke (some articles included multiple outcomes). Although higher levels of total physical activity were significantly associated with lower risk for all outcomes, major gains occurred at lower levels of activity (up to 3000-4000 metabolic equivalent (MET) minutes/week). For example, individuals with a total activity level of 600 MET minutes/week (the minimum recommended level) had a 2% lower risk of diabetes compared with those reporting no physical activity. An increase from 600 to 3600 MET minutes/week reduced the risk by an additional 19%. The same amount of increase yielded much smaller returns at higher levels of activity: an increase of total activity from 9000 to 12 000 MET minutes/week reduced the risk of diabetes by only 0.6%. Compared with insufficiently active individuals (total activity <600 MET minutes/week), the risk reduction for those in the highly active category (≥8000 MET minutes/week) was 14% (relative risk 0.863, 95% uncertainty interval 0.829 to 0.900) for breast cancer; 21% (0.789, 0.735 to 0.850) for colon cancer; 28% (0.722, 0.678 to 0.768) for diabetes; 25% (0.754, 0.704 to 0.809) for ischemic heart disease; and 26% (0.736, 0.659 to 0.811) for ischemic stroke.
CONCLUSIONS
People who achieve total physical activity levels several times higher than the current recommended minimum level have a significant reduction in the risk of the five diseases studied. More studies with detailed quantification of total physical activity will help to find more precise relative risk estimates for different levels of activity.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; China; Colonic Neoplasms; Diabetes Mellitus; Exercise; Ghana; Global Burden of Disease; Humans; India; Metabolic Equivalent; Mexico; Myocardial Ischemia; Risk Factors; Russia; South Africa; Stroke; Time Factors
PubMed: 27510511
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.i3857 -
BMC Public Health Mar 2009Overweight and obese persons are at risk of a number of medical conditions which can lead to further morbidity and mortality. The primary objective of this study is to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Overweight and obese persons are at risk of a number of medical conditions which can lead to further morbidity and mortality. The primary objective of this study is to provide an estimate of the incidence of each co-morbidity related to obesity and overweight using a meta-analysis.
METHODS
A literature search for the twenty co-morbidities identified in a preliminary search was conducted in Medline and Embase (Jan 2007). Studies meeting the inclusion criteria (prospective cohort studies of sufficient size reporting risk estimate based on the incidence of disease) were extracted. Study-specific unadjusted relative risks (RRs) on the log scale comparing overweight with normal and obese with normal were weighted by the inverse of their corresponding variances to obtain a pooled RR with 95% confidence intervals (CI).
RESULTS
A total of 89 relevant studies were identified. The review found evidence for 18 co-morbidities which met the inclusion criteria. The meta-analysis determined statistically significant associations for overweight with the incidence of type II diabetes, all cancers except esophageal (female), pancreatic and prostate cancer, all cardiovascular diseases (except congestive heart failure), asthma, gallbladder disease, osteoarthritis and chronic back pain. We noted the strongest association between overweight defined by body mass index (BMI) and the incidence of type II diabetes in females (RR = 3.92 (95% CI: 3.10-4.97)). Statistically significant associations with obesity were found with the incidence of type II diabetes, all cancers except esophageal and prostate cancer, all cardiovascular diseases, asthma, gallbladder disease, osteoarthritis and chronic back pain. Obesity defined by BMI was also most strongly associated with the incidence of type II diabetes in females (12.41 (9.03-17.06)).
CONCLUSION
Both overweight and obesity are associated with the incidence of multiple co-morbidities including type II diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular diseases. Maintenance of a healthy weight could be important in the prevention of the large disease burden in the future. Further studies are needed to explore the biological mechanisms that link overweight and obesity with these co-morbidities.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Comorbidity; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Female; Gallbladder Diseases; Humans; Incidence; Male; Neoplasms; Obesity; Osteoarthritis; Overweight
PubMed: 19320986
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-9-88 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Mar 2019Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects 8% to 13% of reproductive-aged women and is associated with reproductive and metabolic dysfunction. Obesity worsens the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) affects 8% to 13% of reproductive-aged women and is associated with reproductive and metabolic dysfunction. Obesity worsens the presentation of PCOS and weight management (weight loss, maintenance or prevention of excess weight gain) is proposed as an initial treatment strategy, best achieved through lifestyle changes incorporating diet, exercise and behavioural interventions.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of lifestyle treatment in improving reproductive, anthropometric (weight and body composition), metabolic and quality of life factors in PCOS.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and AMED (date of last search March 2018). We also searched controlled trials registries, conference abstracts, relevant journals, reference lists of relevant papers and reviews, and grey literature databases, with no language restrictions applied.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing lifestyle treatment (diet, exercise, behavioural or combined treatments) to minimal or no treatment in women with PCOS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently selected trials, assessed evidence quality and risk of bias, and extracted data. Our primary outcomes were live birth, miscarriage and pregnancy. We used inverse variance and fixed-effect models in the meta-analyses. We reported dichotomous outcomes as an odds ratio and continuous outcomes as a mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD).
MAIN RESULTS
We included 15 studies with 498 participants. Ten studies compared physical activity to minimal dietary and behavioural intervention or no intervention. Five studies compared combined dietary, exercise and behavioural intervention to minimal intervention. One study compared behavioural intervention to minimal intervention. Risk of bias varied: eight studies had adequate sequence generation, seven had adequate clinician or outcome assessor blinding, seven had adequate allocation concealment, six had complete outcome data and six were free of selective reporting. No studies assessed the fertility primary outcomes of live birth or miscarriage. No studies reported the secondary reproductive outcome of menstrual regularity, as defined in this review.Lifestyle intervention may improve a secondary (endocrine) reproductive outcome, the free androgen index (FAI) (MD -1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.96 to -0.26, 6 RCTs, N = 204, I = 71%, low-quality evidence). Lifestyle intervention may reduce weight (kg) (MD -1.68 kg, 95% CI -2.66 to -0.70, 9 RCTs, N = 353, I = 47%, low-quality evidence). Lifestyle intervention may reduce body mass index (BMI) (kg/m) (-0.34 kg/m, 95% CI -0.68 to -0.01, 12 RCTs, N = 434, I= 0%, low-quality evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of lifestyle intervention on glucose tolerance (glucose outcomes in oral glucose tolerance test) (mmol/L/minute) (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.38 to 0.33, 3 RCTs, N = 121, I = 0%, low-quality evidence).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Lifestyle intervention may improve the free androgen index (FAI), weight and BMI in women with PCOS. We are uncertain of the effect of lifestyle intervention on glucose tolerance. There were no studies that looked at the effect of lifestyle intervention on live birth, miscarriage or menstrual regularity. Most studies in this review were of low quality mainly due to high or unclear risk of bias across most domains and high heterogeneity for the FAI outcome.
Topics: Abdominal Fat; Exercise; Female; Humans; Insulin Resistance; Life Style; Obesity; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Virilism; Waist Circumference; Weight Loss
PubMed: 30921477
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007506.pub4 -
Annals of Family Medicine Mar 2018Although the digital rectal examination (DRE) is commonly performed to screen for prostate cancer, there is limited data to support its use in primary care. This review... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
PURPOSE
Although the digital rectal examination (DRE) is commonly performed to screen for prostate cancer, there is limited data to support its use in primary care. This review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of DRE in screening for prostate cancer in primary care settings.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, DARE (Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) from their inception to June 2016. Six reviewers, in pairs, independently screened citations for eligibility and extracted data. Pooled estimates were calculated for sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of DRE in primary care settings using an inverse-variance meta-analysis. We used QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2) and GRADE (Grades of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) guidelines to assess study risk of bias and quality.
RESULTS
Our search yielded 8,217 studies, of which 7 studies with 9,241 patients were included after the screening process. All patients analyzed underwent both DRE and biopsy. Pooled sensitivity of DRE performed by primary care clinicians was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.36-0.67; I = 98.4%) and pooled specificity was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.41-0.76; I = 99.4%). Pooled PPV was 0.41 (95% CI, 0.31-0.52; I = 97.2%), and pooled NPV was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.58-0.70; I = 95.0%). The quality of evidence as assessed with GRADE was very low.
CONCLUSION
Given the considerable lack of evidence supporting its efficacy, we recommend against routine performance of DRE to screen for prostate cancer in the primary care setting.
Topics: Digital Rectal Examination; Early Detection of Cancer; Humans; Male; Primary Health Care; Prostatic Neoplasms
PubMed: 29531107
DOI: 10.1370/afm.2205 -
European Urology Oncology Dec 2021During the past decade, several urinary biomarker tests (UBTs) for bladder cancer have been developed and made commercially available. However, none of these is... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
During the past decade, several urinary biomarker tests (UBTs) for bladder cancer have been developed and made commercially available. However, none of these is recommended by international guidelines so far.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the diagnostic estimates of novel commercially available UBTs for diagnosis and surveillance of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) using diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) and network meta-analysis (NMA).
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched up to April 2021 to identify studies addressing the diagnostic values of UBTs: Xpert bladder cancer, Adxbladder, Bladder EpiCheck, Uromonitor and Cxbladder Monitor, and Triage and Detect. The primary endpoint was to assess the pooled diagnostic values for disease recurrence in NMIBC patients using a DTA meta-analysis and to compare them with cytology using an NMA. The secondary endpoints were the diagnostic values for high-grade (HG) recurrence as well as for the initial detection of bladder cancer.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Twenty-one studies, comprising 7330 patients, were included in the quantitative synthesis. In most of the studies, there was an unclear risk of bias. For NMIBC surveillance, novel UBTs demonstrated promising pooled diagnostic values with sensitivities up to 93%, specificities up to 84%, positive predictive values up to 67%, and negative predictive value up to 99%. Pooled estimates for the diagnosis of HG recurrence were similar to those for the diagnosis of any-grade recurrence. The analysis of the number of cystoscopies potentially avoided during the follow-up of 1000 patients showed that UBTs might be efficient in reducing the number of avoidable interventions with up to 740 cystoscopies. The NMA revealed that diagnostic values (except specificity) of the novel UBTs were significantly higher than those of cytology for the detection of NMIBC recurrence. There were too little data on UBTs in the primary diagnosis setting to allow a statistical analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
Our analyses support high diagnostic accuracy of the studied novel UBTs, supporting their utility in the NMIBC surveillance setting. All of these might potentially help prevent unnecessary cystoscopies safely. There are not enough data to reliably assess their use in the primary diagnostic setting. These results have to be confirmed in a larger cohort as well as in head-to-head comparative studies. Nevertheless, our study might help policymakers and stakeholders evaluate the clinical and social impact of the implementation of these tests into daily practice.
PATIENT SUMMARY
Novel urinary biomarker tests outperform cytology with the potential of improving routine clinical practice by preventing unnecessary cystoscopic examinations during the surveillance of non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.
Topics: Biomarkers, Tumor; Cystoscopy; Humans; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Network Meta-Analysis; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
PubMed: 34753702
DOI: 10.1016/j.euo.2021.10.003 -
Gastroenterology Jan 2017Certain subsets of colorectal serrated polyps (SP) have malignant potential. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Certain subsets of colorectal serrated polyps (SP) have malignant potential. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the association between modifiable lifestyle factors and risk for SPs.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic search of Medline, Embase, and Web of Science for observational or interventional studies that contained the terms risk or risk factor, and serrated or hyperplastic, and polyps or adenomas, and colorectal (or synonymous terms), published by March 2016. Titles and abstracts of identified articles were independently reviewed by at least 2 reviewers. Adjusted relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were combined using random effects meta-analyses to assess the risk of SP, when possible.
RESULTS
We identified 43 studies of SP risk associated with 7 different lifestyle factors: smoking, alcohol, body fatness, diet, physical activity, medication, and hormone-replacement therapy. When we compared the highest and lowest categories of exposure, factors we found to significantly increase risk for SP included tobacco smoking (RR, 2.47; 95% CI, 2.12-2.87), alcohol intake (RR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.17-1.52), body mass index (RR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.22-1.61), and high intake of fat or meat. Direct associations for smoking and alcohol, but not body fat, tended to be stronger for sessile serrated adenomas/polyps than hyperplastic polyps. In contrast, factors we found to significantly decrease risks for SP included use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (RR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.65-0.92) or aspirin (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.67-0.99), as well as high intake of folate, calcium, or fiber. No significant associations were detected between SP risk and physical activity or hormone replacement therapy.
CONCLUSIONS
Several lifestyle factors, most notably smoking and alcohol, are associated with SP risk. These findings enhance our understanding of mechanisms of SP development and indicate that risk of serrated pathway colorectal neoplasms could be reduced with lifestyle changes.
Topics: Adenoma; Alcohol Drinking; Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Body Mass Index; Colon; Colonic Polyps; Diet; Exercise; Humans; Hyperplasia; Life Style; Protective Factors; Rectal Diseases; Rectum; Risk Factors; Smoking
PubMed: 27639804
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2016.09.003 -
Clinical and Molecular Hepatology Jan 2021In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to clarify the effect of obesity on the occurrence of and mortality from primary liver cancer. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND/AIMS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aimed to clarify the effect of obesity on the occurrence of and mortality from primary liver cancer.
METHODS
This study was conducted using a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library until November 2018 using the primary keywords "obesity," "overweight," "body mass index (BMI)," "body weight," "liver," "cancer," "hepatocellular carcinoma," "liver cancer," "risk," and "mortality." Studies assessing the relationship between BMI and occurrence of or mortality from primary liver cancer in prospective cohorts and those reporting hazard ratios (HRs) or data that allow HR estimation were included.
RESULTS
A total of 28 prospective cohort studies with 8,135,906 subjects were included in the final analysis. These included 22 studies with 6,059,561 subjects for cancer occurrence and seven studies with 2,077,425 subjects for cancerrelated mortality. In the meta-analysis, an increase in BMI was associated with the occurrence of primary liver cancer (HR, 1.69; 95% confidence interval, 1.50-1.90, I2=56%). A BMI-dependent increase in the risk of occurrence of primary liver cancer was reported. HRs were 1.36 (95% CI, 1.02-1.81), 1.77 (95% CI, 1.56-2.01), and 3.08 (95% CI, 1.21-7.86) for BMI >25 kg/m2, >30 kg/m2, and >35 kg/m2, respectively. Furthermore, increased BMI resulted in enhanced liver cancer-related mortality (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.14-2.27, I2=80%).
CONCLUSION
High BMI increases liver cancer mortality and occurrence of primary liver cancer. Obesity is an independent risk factor for the occurrence of and mortality from primary liver cancer.
Topics: Body Mass Index; Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Male; Obesity; Overweight; Prospective Studies; Risk Factors
PubMed: 33238333
DOI: 10.3350/cmh.2020.0176 -
Ageing Research Reviews Dec 2020Chronic inflammation has been associated with sarcopenia and its components skeletal muscle strength and muscle mass. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Chronic inflammation has been associated with sarcopenia and its components skeletal muscle strength and muscle mass. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the relationship between systemic inflammation, muscle strength and/or muscle mass in adults.
METHODS
An electronic search using keywords such as 'acute phase proteins, cytokines and sarcopenia, muscle mass, muscle strength' was conducted via Pubmed, Web of Science and Embase from inception until the 30th of June 2020. A meta-analysis using correlation data was performed to determine the overall relationship between inflammation and muscle strength and muscle mass in adults.
RESULTS
Overall, 168 articles; 149 cross-sectional articles (n = 76,899 participants, 47.0 % male) and 19 longitudinal articles (n = 12,295 participants, 31.9 % male) met inclusion criteria. Independent of disease state, higher levels of C reactive protein (CRP), Interleukin (IL)-6 and Tumor necrosis factor (TNF)α were associated with lower handgrip and knee extension strength (CRP; r = -0.10, p < 0.001, IL-6; r = -0.13, p < 0.001, TNFα; r = -0.08, p < 0.001 and CRP; r = -0.18, p < 0.001, IL-6; r = -0.11, p < 0.001, TNFα; r = -0.13, p < 0.001 respectively) and muscle mass (CRP; r = -0.12, p < 0.001, IL-6; r = -0.09, p < 0.001, TNFα; r = -0.15, p < 0.001). Furthermore, higher levels of systemic inflammatory markers appeared to be associated with lower muscle strength and muscle mass over time.
CONCLUSION
Higher levels of circulating inflammatory markers are significantly associated with lower skeletal muscle strength and muscle mass.
Topics: Biomarkers; Cross-Sectional Studies; Female; Hand Strength; Humans; Inflammation; Male; Muscle Strength; Muscle, Skeletal; Sarcopenia
PubMed: 32992047
DOI: 10.1016/j.arr.2020.101185