Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17696248›Full record

SynthesisWorld journal of gastroenterology2007

Obesity and colorectal cancer risk: a meta-analysis of cohort studies.

Zhe Dai, Yan-Cheng Xu, Li Niu

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in World journal of gastroenterology, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 119 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
119citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

119 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Colorectal adenomas and diabetes: implications for disease prevention.Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland · 2015
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Components of metabolic syndrome and metachronous colorectal neoplasia.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2009
    Trial
  16. Article
  17. Circulating CD16+ CD56+ Natural Killer Cells in Colorectal Cancer and Their Correlation with Survival.Malawi medical journal : the journal of Medical Association of Malawi · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

59 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Zhe DaiDepartment of Endocrinology, Zhongnan Hospital, Wuhan University, Wuhan 430071, Hubei Province, China.
Yan-Cheng Xu
Li Niu

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo evaluate the association between obesity and colorectal cancer risk.

methodsWe searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to January 1, 2007. Cohort studies permitting the assessment of causal association between obesity and colorectal cancer, with clear definition of obesity and well-defined outcome of colorectal cancer were eligible. Study design, sample size at baseline, mean follow-up time, co-activators and study results were extracted. Pooled standardized effect sizes were calculated.

resultsThe pooled relative risk (RR) of colorectal cancer was 1.37 (95% CI: 1.21-1.56) for overweight and obese men, 1.07 (95% CI: 0.97-1.18) for women measured by body mass index (BMI). The pooled RR for the highest vs the lowest quantiles of BMI was 1.59 (95% CI: 1.35-1.86) for men and 1.22 (95% CI: 1.08-1.39) for women at risk of colon cancer, 1.16 (95% CI: 0.93-1.46) for men and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.98-1.54) for women at risk of rectal cancer. The pooled RR for the highest vs the lowest quantiles of waist circumference was 1.68 (95% CI: 1.36-2.08) for men and 1.48 (95% CI: 1.19-1.84) for women at risk of colon cancer, 1.26 (95% CI: 0.90-1.77) for men and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.81-1.86) for women at risk of rectal cancer. The pooled RR for the highest quantiles vs the lowest quantiles of waist-to-hip ratio was 1.91 (95% CI: 1.46-2.49) for men and 1.49 (95% CI 1.23-1.81) for women at risk of colon cancer, 1.93 (95% CI: 1.19-3.13) for men and 1.20 (95% CI: 0.81-1.78) for women at risk of rectal cancer. Compared with 'normal range', the pooled RR for proximal colon cancer was 1.14 (95% CI: 0.88-1.47) for the overweight and 1.41 (95% CI: 0.66-3.01) for the obese. The pooled RR for the highest quantiles vs the lowest quantiles was 2.05 (95% CI: 1.23-3.41) with waist circumference, 1.66 (95% CI: 0.69-3.99) with waist-to-hip ratio. Compared with 'normal range', the pooled RR for distal colon cancer was 1.38 (95% CI: 1.02-1.87) for the overweight and 1.23 (95% CI: 0.80-1.90) for the obese. The pooled RR for the highest quantiles vs the lowest quantiles was 1.86 (95% CI: 1.05-3.30) with waist circumference, and 1.79 (95% CI: 0.82-3.90) with waist-to-hip ratio.

conclusionObesity is a statistically significant risk factor for colorectal cancer and the relationship is more significant in men than in women among different cancer subsites. Indexes of abdominal obesity are more sensitive than those of overall obesity.

Indexed as

ObesityAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBody Mass IndexCohort StudiesColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRisk FactorsWaist-Hip Ratio

Identifiers

PMID17696248
PMCPMC4250618

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.