4.4 Article

Physical Activity Is Associated with Reduced Risk of Gastric Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

期刊

CANCER PREVENTION RESEARCH
卷 7, 期 1, 页码 12-22

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-13-0282

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Takeda Pharmaceuticals

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Physical activity may be associated with reduced risk of gastric cancer. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the magnitude of the association and the quality of supporting evidence. After a comprehensive search of bibliographic databases and conference proceedings through February 2013 for observational studies that examined associations between recreational and/or occupational physical activity and gastric cancer risk, we identified 16 studies (seven cohort, nine case control) reporting 11,111 cases of gastric cancer among 1,606,760 patients. Summary adjusted-OR estimates with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using the random-effects model. Meta-analysis demonstrated that the risk of gastric cancer was 21% lower among the most physically active people as compared with the least physically active people (OR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.71-0.87) with moderate heterogeneity among studies (I-2 = 55%). This protective effect was seen for gastric cancers in the cardia (four studies; OR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.63-1.00) and distal stomach (five studies; OR = 0.63; 95% CI, 0.52-0.76). The effect size was significantly smaller in high-quality studies (six studies; OR = 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99), as compared with low-quality studies (10 studies; OR = 0.74; 95% CI, 0.69-0.81). The results were consistent across sex, study quality, study design, and geographic location. In conclusion, meta-analysis of published observational studies indicates that physical activity is associated with reduced risk of gastric cancer. Lifestyle interventions focusing on increasing physical activity may decrease the global burden of gastric cancer, in addition to a myriad of other health benefits.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据