MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3032335884 · doi:10.1093/sleep/zsaa056.596

0599 The Association Between Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Cancer Incidence and Mortality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020· review· en· W3032335884 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert L. Sutherland, J Platt

Bibliographic record

VenueSLEEP · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisObstructive sleep apneaIncidence (geometry)Internal medicineSleep apneaPopulationPublication biasCohort studyMEDLINEOncologyEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Sleep related breathing disorders (SRBD) are common (20% prevalence) in the general population and can have multiple health consequences. There is growing evidence that chronic hypoxia - a key consequence of sleep apnea - is a common feature in solid tumour tissue, therapeutic resistance, tumour progression, and metastasis. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the association between sleep apnea, cancer incidence, or mortality. A review of all available literature and subsequent meta-analysis was done to clarify these relationships. Methods A thorough literature search was completed using Medline, EMBASE and Web of Science databases. The search resulted in 7222 studies, 1551 duplicates were removed, 5552 studies were removed after abstract screening, and full text review was done on 119 studies, yielding 12 full retrospective cohort studies. The risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Review and data extraction were done in duplicate. Results In the pooled analysis, 9 studies totalling 2,358405 subjects with OSA and 3.97% cancer incidence and 2,442794 subjects without OSA and 3.35% cancer incidence. A random effects model with inverse-variance weighting analysis yielded an unadjusted OR = 1.32 (95% CI: 0.76 - 2.30). After 2 studies with a moderate risk of bias were removed the pooling yielded an OR = 1.89 (95% CI: 0.99 - 3.50). Heterogeneity was high at 99.9% p-value less than 0.01. Meta-regression was then done to assess for the cause(s) of heterogeneity sex, age, or BMI were not significant contributors. A review of 3 studies, which included cancer mortality, was done. Hazard ratios in 2 studies suggested OSA increased the risk of cancer mortality. Hazard ratios also increased with increasing OSA severity. Conclusion Sleep apnea significantly increases cancer mortality and is positively associated with increasing severity. Meta-analysis demonstrated an 86% increase in the unadjusted odds of cancer in those with sleep apnea. However, this result was borderline non-significant with high heterogeneity. Further studies may be helpful in determining the true associations between sleep apnea and cancer. Support None.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score0.918

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.374
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSLEEPSame topicCancer Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207