scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Risk factors for endometrial cancer: An umbrella review of the literature.

TLDR
Of many proposed risk factors, only three had strong association without hints of bias, and Identification of genuine risk factors associated with endometrial cancer may assist in developing targeted prevention strategies for women at high risk.
Abstract
Although many risk factors could have causal association with endometrial cancer, they are also prone to residual confounding or other biases which could lead to over- or underestimation. This umbrella review evaluates the strength and validity of evidence pertaining risk factors for endometrial cancer. Systematic reviews or meta-analyses of observational studies evaluating the association between non-genetic risk factors and risk of developing or dying from endometrial cancer were identified from inception to April 2018 using PubMed, the Cochrane database and manual reference screening. Evidence was graded strong, highly suggestive, suggestive or weak based on statistical significance of random-effects summary estimate, largest study included, number of cases, between-study heterogeneity, 95% prediction intervals, small study effects, excess significance bias and sensitivity analysis with credibility ceilings. We identified 171 meta-analyses investigating associations between 53 risk factors and endometrial cancer incidence and mortality. Risk factors were categorised: anthropometric indices, dietary intake, physical activity, medical conditions, hormonal therapy use, biochemical markers, gynaecological history and smoking. Of 127 meta-analyses including cohort studies, three associations were graded with strong evidence. Body mass index and waist-to-hip ratio were associated with increased cancer risk in premenopausal women (RR per 5 kg/m2 1.49; CI 1.39-1.61) and for total endometrial cancer (RR per 0.1unit 1.21; CI 1.13-1.29), respectively. Parity reduced risk of disease (RR 0.66, CI 0.60-0.74). Of many proposed risk factors, only three had strong association without hints of bias. Identification of genuine risk factors associated with endometrial cancer may assist in developing targeted prevention strategies for women at high risk.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Endometrial cancer

TL;DR: In this paper , the authors proposed minimally invasive surgical staging and sentinel-lymph-node biopsy for endometrial cancer, which provides a low morbidity alternative to historical surgical management without compromising oncological outcomes.
Journal ArticleDOI

Estrogen Signaling in Endometrial Cancer: a Key Oncogenic Pathway with Several Open Questions

TL;DR: The evidence for the importance of estrogen signaling in endometrial cancer, details of the endometricrial cancer-specific actions of ER, and open questions surrounding estrogen signaling are discussed.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Meta-Analysis: A Constantly Evolving Research Integration Tool

TL;DR: The four articles in this special section onMeta-analysis illustrate some of the complexities entailed in meta-analysis methods and contributes both to advancing this methodology and to the increasing complexities that can befuddle researchers.
Journal ArticleDOI

Overweight, obesity, and mortality from cancer in a prospectively studied cohort of U.S. adults.

TL;DR: Current patterns of overweight and obesity in the United States could account for 14 percent of all deaths from cancer in men and 20 percent of those in women, and increased body weight was associated with increased death rates for all cancers combined and for cancers at multiple specific sites.

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

TL;DR: In this paper, the authors discuss the implications of these problems for the conduct and interpretation of research and suggest that claimed research findings may often be simply accurate measures of the prevailing bias.
Journal ArticleDOI

Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews

TL;DR: A measurement tool for the 'assessment of multiple systematic reviews' (AMSTAR) was developed that consists of 11 items and has good face and content validity for measuring the methodological quality of systematic reviews.
Related Papers (5)

Integrated genomic characterization of endometrial carcinoma

Gad Getz, +283 more
- 02 May 2013 -