Relationship between periodontal disease and lung cancer: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Periodontal disease (PD), as a chronic bacterial infection, might cause cardiovascular and some other systemic diseases, with recent studies reporting that it exhibits some connection with lung cancer. While studies have shown that poor oral health might increase the risk of lung cancer, the veracity of these reports is questionable. Therefore, this meta‐analysis was undertaken to investigate the association between PD and the risk of lung cancer. A search was run in PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases up to January 1, 2020. Cohort and case‐control studies investigating the correlation between PD and lung cancer were included. Eligibility assessment and data extraction were conducted independently, and a meta‐analysis was performed to synthesize the data. The association between PD, edentulism, and lung cancer was measured by the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) or odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) provided in articles. We employed appropriate effect model in terms of I 2 (a fixed‐effect model for PD and a random‐effect model for edentulism) to obtain summary effect estimates. Statistical heterogeneity was investigated by chi‐square test and I 2 statistics. Newcastle‐Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of their method. Six cohort studies (eight references) and two case‐control studies, assessed as high‐quality, involving 167 256 participants, were included in the review. The summary estimates based on adjusted data showed an association between PD and a significant risk of lung cancer both in cohort studies (HR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.25‐1.58; I 2 = 8.7%) and case‐control studies (OR = 1.51, 95% CI = 1.16‐1.98; I 2 = 36.5%). Similar features were found in the sensitivity analysis and subgroups for six cohort studies, of male only (HR = 1.36, 95% CI = 1.15‐2.60), setting the lung cancer incidence as endpoint (HR = 1.39, 95% CI = 1.24‐1.57; I 2 = 23.9%), and adjusting alcohol for multifactorial HR (HR = 1.38, 95% CI = 1.21‐1.57; I 2 = 39.9%). The summary HR for edentulism was 1.93 (95% CI = 1.05‐3.57; I 2 = 55.3%). No obvious publication bias was detected. This systematic review and meta‐analysis demonstrated a significant association between PD and the incidence of lung cancer. Further observational studies are required by using standardized measurements to assess the periodontal status and by eliminating confounding factors, such as alcohol and diabetes, to verify such a relationship.
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.
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 | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,010 | 0,003 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 découle