The Relationship Between Obesity and Lymphoma: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Cohort Studies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Abstract 5198 Introduction: Lymphoma is a common hematologic malignancy, etiology of which remains largely unclear. Obesity and overweight have been associated with an increased risk of developing lymphoma; however, with conflicting results. The main objective of this meta-analysis is to evaluate the potential relationship that overweight and obesity may have in the development of lymphoma in adults. A secondary objective was to evaluate the risk of separate lymphoma subtypes, such as Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and the most common NHL subtypes – diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL) – in overweight and obese individuals. Methods: A MEDLINE search from January 1950 to December 2010 was undertaken using: (obesity OR “body mass index” OR BMI OR overweight) AND (leukemia OR lymphoma OR myeloma). Only prospective cohort studies reporting on the incidence of lymphoma were included. Retrospective case-control and cross-sectional studies were excluded. Meta-analyses were performed for HL, NHL and NHL subtypes. The outcome was calculated as relative risk (RR). Overweight was defined as body mass index (BMI) 25–29.9 kg/m2 and obesity as BMI ≥30 kg/m2, according to the WHO criteria. The quality of the studies was determined by the Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS). The random effects model was used to calculate the combined outcome. Heterogeneity was assessed by the I2 statistic. Publication bias was assessed by the trim-and-fill analysis. Meta-regression analyses were performed to evaluate the association between BMI, as a continuous variable, and the incidence of HL and NHL in general and NHL subtypes. Literature search, data gathering and study quality assessment were performed independently by at least two of the investigators. All graphs and calculations were obtained using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis version 2 (Biostat, Englewood, NJ). Results: From 758 returns, 22 prospective cohort studies evaluating the association between obesity and lymphoma were identified. All the studies were of high quality (NOS >7 points). For NHL, the overall RR was 1.06 (95% CI 1.02–1.10; p=0.001). For overweight and obese patients, the RR were 1.04 (95% CI 1.01–1.07; p=0.02) and 1.11 (95% CI 1.06–1.16; p<0.001), respectively. Meta-regression showed a linear association between BMI and incidence of NHL (p<0.001). For DLBCL, the overall RR was 1.14 (95% CI 1.01–1.29; p=0.03). Overweight and obese patients had a RR of 1.08 (95% CI 0.96–1.22; p=0.22) and 1.24 (95% CI 1.08–1.44; p=0.003), respectively. Meta-regression showed a trend towards a significant association between BMI and incidence of DLBCL (p=0.1). For FL, the overall RR was 1.11 (95% CI 0.99–1.25; p=0.08). Overweight and obese patients had a RR of 1.10 (95% CI 0.94–1.28; p=0.25) and 1.15 (95% CI 0.97–1.36; p=0.11), respectively. Meta-regression showed no association between BMI and incidence of FL (p=0.78). For HL, the overall RR was 1.10 (95% CI 0.97–1.26; p=0.15). Overweight and obese patients had a RR of 0.91 (95% CI 0.80–1.03; p=0.13) and 1.23 (95% CI 1.05–1.44; p=0.009), respectively. Meta-regression showed a statistically significant linear relationship between BMI and incidence of HL (p=0.009). Conclusions: Obesity was associated with a mild increased risk of developing HL (23%), NHL in general (11%) and DLBCL (24%), but there was no association with FL. There was a statistically significant linear association between BMI and HL as well as for NHL in general, but only a trend towards an association with DLBCL. Disclosures: Castillo: GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».