ReviewJournal of mid-life health
Association of Telomere Length with Ovarian Cancer Risk and Survival: A Systematic Review and Meta -analysis.
Review in Journal of mid-life health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Telomeres are protective DNA sequences at chromosome ends that shorten with cell division and regulate cellular lifespan. Dysregulation of telomere maintenance through telomerase activation is implicated in carcinogenesis, including ovarian cancer. This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the association between telomere length and ovarian cancer risk and survival outcomes. Methodology: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was conducted from inception to the final search date. Studies evaluating measured telomere length in relation to ovarian cancer risk or survival were included. Eligible observational studies reporting effect estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) were synthesized for ovarian cancer risk, while hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled for survival outcomes. Heterogeneity was assessed using Cochran's Q test and the Results: Eleven studies were included in the systematic review, of which seven were eligible for meta-analysis (four risk studies and three survival studies). For ovarian cancer risk, the pooled common-effect estimate showed a modest association (OR = 1.17; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-1.34), but this was not statistically significant under the random-effects model (OR = 1.23; 95% CI: 0.70-2.16) with moderate heterogeneity ( Conclusions: Current evidence does not demonstrate a consistent association between telomere length and ovarian cancer risk or survival. Substantial heterogeneity across studies highlights the need for large, well-designed prospective studies with standardized telomere measurement methods to clarify the role of telomere dynamics in ovarian carcinogenesis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.