SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Allostatic load in female cancer patients: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The physiological burden of chronic stress, quantified as allostatic load (AL), is implicated in cancer development and outcomes. However, a synthesis of evidence regarding its role in female-specific cancers is lacking. Objective: This systematic review aimed to synthesize existing evidence on the application of AL in female cancer patients, covering both its predictive value for cancer risk in healthy populations and its prognostic significance for outcomes and quality of life in cancer patients. Methods: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Springer Link, and Wiley Online Library from inception to June 2025. Studies investigating AL in patients with common female cancers (e.g., breast, endometrial, ovarian) were included. Study quality was assessed using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. Data on study characteristics, AL assessment methods, associated factors, and key findings were extracted. Results: 17 studies (14 on breast cancer, 2 on endometrial cancer, and 1 on ovarian cancer) were included. AL levels were influenced by sociodemographic, lifestyle, and structural factors. Higher AL was associated with an increased risk of female cancers (particularly breast cancer) incidence, poorer health-related quality of life, a higher incidence of postoperative complications (e.g., lymphedema), and increased all-cause mortality. And existing studies exhibit heterogeneity in biomarker selection and scoring thresholds. Conclusions: AL is a promising composite marker associated with the risk, prognosis, and quality of life in female cancer patients, primarily breast cancer. Current evidence is concentrated on breast cancer with limited evidence available for other types of female cancers. Future research requires standardized AL assessment and investigations across diverse female cancer populations. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD420251080672.
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.