4.7 Review

Insulin resistance and endometrial cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 51, Issue 18, Pages 2747-2758

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.08.031

Keywords

Insulin resistance; Endometrial cancer; Meta-analysis

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Aim: It has been suggested that chronic hyperinsulinemia from insulin resistance is involved in the etiology of endometrial cancer (EC). We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess whether insulin resistance is associated with the risk of EC. Methods: We searched PubMed-Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles published from database inception through 30th September 2014. We included all observational studies evaluating components defining insulin resistance in women with and without EC. Quality of the included studies was assessed by NewcastleeOttawa scale. Random-effects models and inverse variance method were used to meta-analyze the association between insulin resistance components and EC. Results: Twenty-five studies satisfied our inclusion criteria. Fasting insulin levels (13 studies, n = 4088) were higher in women with EC (mean difference [MD] 33.94 pmol/L, 95% confidence interval [CI] 15.04-52.85, p = 0.0004). No differences were seen in postmenopausal versus pre- and postmenopausal subgroup analysis. Similarly, non-fasting/fasting C-peptide levels (five studies, n = 1938) were also higher in women with EC (MD 0.14 nmol/L, 95% CI 0.08-0.21, p < 0.00001). Homeostatic model assessment - insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) values (six studies, n = 1859) in EC patients were significantly higher than in women without EC (MD 1.13, 95% CI 0.20-2.06, p = 0.02). There was moderate-to-high heterogeneity among the included studies. Conclusion: Currently available epidemiologic evidence is suggestive of significantly higher risk of EC in women with high fasting insulin, non-fasting/fasting C-peptide and HOMA-IR values. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available