Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35284439›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in nutrition2022

The Association Between Metabolic Status and Risk of Cancer Among Patients With Obesity: Metabolically Healthy Obesity vs. Metabolically Unhealthy Obesity.

Xiaonan Zheng, Ruilin Peng, Hang Xu, Tianhai Lin, Shi Qiu, Qiang Wei, Lu Yang, Jianzhong Ai

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Xiaonan ZhengDepartment of Urology and Institute of Urology of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ruilin PengDepartment of Radiation Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Hang XuDepartment of Urology and Institute of Urology of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Tianhai LinDepartment of Urology and Institute of Urology of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Shi QiuDepartment of Urology and Institute of Urology of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Qiang WeiDepartment of Urology and Institute of Urology of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Lu YangDepartment of Urology and Institute of Urology of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jianzhong AiDepartment of Urology and Institute of Urology of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
West China Hospital of Sichuan University · CNSichuan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Controversial evidence about the association between cancer risk and metabolic status among individuals with obesity has been reported, but pooled data remain absent. This study aims to present pooled data comparing cancer risk between patients with metabolically healthy obesity (MHO) and metabolically unhealthy obesity (MUO). Methods: The current study systematically searched pieces of literature on January 4, 2021, of prospective cohorts that compare the incidence of cancer between MHO and MUO. The quality of included studies was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa scale, and publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots. Results: Eleven high-quality studies were eventually selected. Quantitative analysis indicates that a lower cancer incidence exists for MHO phenotype than that for MUO (odds ratio [OR], 0.71; 95% confidential interval [CI], 0.61-0.84). Consistent outcomes are presented by subgroup analyses, which are grouped by cohort region (western population: [OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.75-0.93]; Asian population: [OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.54-0.77]); definition of metabolic unhealthiness (≥3 metabolic abnormalities: [OR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.54-0.71]; ≥1 metabolic abnormality: [OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.62-0.94]); and definition of obesity (body mass index (BMI), ≥30 kg/m Conclusion: In conclusion, this study suggests a reduced cancer risk for MHO compared to MUO regardless of population heterogeneity, or the definitions of obesity and metabolic status.

Indexed as

meta-analysismetabolically healthy obesity (MHO)metabolically unhealthy obesity (MUO)pan-cancerrisk of cancer

Identifiers

PMID35284439
PMCPMC8914254
OpenAlexW4214709334

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.