Socioeconomic inequalities and oral cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies

2008 ◽  
Vol 122 (12) ◽  
pp. 2811-2819 ◽  
Author(s):  
David I. Conway ◽  
Mark Petticrew ◽  
Helen Marlborough ◽  
Julien Berthiller ◽  
Mia Hashibe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Oral Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Socioeconomic Inequalities ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Oral Cancer Risk

scholarly journals Citrus fruits intake and oral cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 133 ◽  
pp. 187-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Santa Cirmi ◽  
Michele Navarra ◽  
Jayne V. Woodside ◽  
Marie M. Cantwell
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Oral Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Citrus Fruits ◽  
Oral Cancer Risk

scholarly journals Sedentary behaviour in relation to ovarian cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veronika S. Biller ◽  
Michael F. Leitzmann ◽  
Anja M. Sedlmeier ◽  
Felix F. Berger ◽  
Olaf Ortmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Sedentary Behaviour ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Ovarian Cancer Risk ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Prospective Cohort Studies

AbstractSedentary behaviour is an emerging risk factor for several site-specific cancers. Ovarian cancers are often detected at late disease stages and the role of sedentary behaviour as a modifiable risk factor potentially contributing to ovarian cancer risk has not been extensively examined. We systematically searched relevant databases from inception to February 2020 for eligible publications dealing with sedentary behaviour in relation to ovarian cancer risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, calculating summary relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. We calculated the E-Value, a sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding. We tested for publication bias and heterogeneity. Seven studies (three prospective cohort studies and four case–control studies) including 2060 ovarian cancer cases were analysed. Comparing highest versus lowest levels of sedentary behaviour, the data indicated a statistically significant increase in the risk of ovarian cancer in relation to prolonged sitting time (RR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.07–1.57). Sub-analyses of prospective cohort studies (RR = 1.33, 95% CI = 0.92–1.93) and case–control studies (RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 0.98–1.68) showed statistically non-significant results. Sensitivity analysis showed that an unmeasured confounder would need to be related to sedentary behaviour and ovarian cancer with a RR of 1.90 to fully explain away the observed RR of 1.29. Our analyses showed a statistically significant positive association between sedentary behaviour and ovarian cancer risk.

scholarly journals The Influence of Incidental Detection of Thyroid Nodule on Thyroid Cancer Risk and Prognosis - a Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. A871-A871
Author(s):  
Je Ern Chooi ◽  
Abiramie Ravindiran ◽  
Saba P Balasubramanian
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Thyroid Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Thyroid Nodules ◽  
Tumour Progression ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Current Evidence ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Thyroid Cancer Risk

Abstract Clinically unapparent thyroid nodules discovered serendipitously on imaging for non-thyroid indications are termed ‘thyroid incidentalomas’. The increase in the detection of these incidentalomas (which are known to be very common) has been attributed to the widespread use of diagnostic imaging and the increase in sensitivity and resolution of these modalities. It is unclear whether these incidentalomas have a lower prevalence of thyroid cancer or slower tumour progression compared to symptomatic thyroid nodules. This systematic review aimed to determine the risk of malignancy in incidentally detected thyroid nodules and its impact on prognosis in patients with thyroid cancer. PubMed and MEDLINE® on Web of Science databases were searched from inception to March 2020 for English language articles reporting on human studies of thyroid cancer risk and/or prognosis in incidental and non-incidental nodules. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Seventeen observational studies published between 1998 and 2018 were eligible for analysis; 4 studies reported on risk, 8 studies on prognosis and 5 studies on both risk and prognosis. In the risk review, the odds ratios calculated from the six case-control studies (3246 patients) ranged from 0.64 to 2.86 whilst the relative risks calculated from the three cohort studies (489 patients) ranged from 0.13 to 6.27. NOS score for included risk studies (n=9) ranged from 22.2% to 66.7%. A meta-analysis of the eligible case-control studies (n=3) showed a non-significant summated odds ratio of 1.04 (95% CI=0.63-1.70, p=0.88). In the prognosis review of thirteen studies, three direct and thirteen indirect markers of prognosis were compared between the incidental (1923 patients) and non-incidental (2639 patients) groups. NOS score for included prognosis studies ranged from 66.7% to 100%. Incidentally detected thyroid nodules were significantly more likely to be smaller, have lower rates of extra-thyroidal and extra-nodal extension and lymph node metastasis, and interestingly more likely to have advanced disease. Other indirect prognostic markers were not shown to be significantly different between the two groups. A meta-analysis was not possible but incidentally detected thyroid cancer had better progression-free and overall survival; this finding may be affected by ‘lead time’ bias. Current evidence suggests that the investigation and management of thyroid nodules should not be influenced by the mode of detection.

scholarly journals Meat, fish, and ovarian cancer risk: results from 2 Australian case-control studies, a systematic review, and meta-analysis

2010 ◽  
Vol 91 (6) ◽  
pp. 1752-1763 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fariba Kolahdooz ◽  
Jolieke C van der Pols ◽  
Christopher J Bain ◽  
Geoffrey C Marks ◽  
Maria Celia Hughes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ovarian Cancer ◽  
Cancer Risk ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Case Control ◽  
Ovarian Cancer Risk ◽  
Case Control Studies ◽  
Australian Case
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document