4.5 Review

Influence of serum total cholesterol, LDL, HDL, and triglyceride on prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy

Journal

CANCER MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH
Volume 11, Issue -, Pages 6651-6661

Publisher

DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S204947

Keywords

serum lipids; prostate cancer; recurrence; radical prostatectomy; meta-analysis

Categories

Funding

  1. Zhejiang Science and Technology Project [2017C33058]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The clinical impacts of serum lipid levels on prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy have been evaluated by several observational studies with conflicting results. We performed the present meta-analysis to summarize the evidence evaluating the role of serum lipid profile in prostate cancer patients. Methods: We comprehensively searched the PubMed database for potentially relevant studies through January 2019. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the highest versus the lowest level of serum lipid levels were calculated with the DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model. Results: A total of 12 eligible studies with 10,978 prostate cancer cases were included in this study. The pooled HRs of prostate cancer recurrence after racial prostatectomy were 0.92 (95% CI 0.73-1.16, P=0.462), 0.87 (95% CI 0.56-1.35, P=0.535), 1.09 (95% CI 0.92-1.30, P=0.320), and 1.01 (95% CI 0.78-1.31, P=0.938) for serum total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, and triglyceride, respectively. Sensitivity analysis was conducted by excluding each study sequentially and the results showed that all the summary risk estimates were stable and not influenced by any single study. Conclusion: The present meta-analysis indicated that serum lipid levels in patients undergoing radical prostatectomy were not associated with prostate cancer recurrence.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available