Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22028402›Full record

SynthesisCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2012

Sex hormones, hormonal interventions, and gastric cancer risk: a meta-analysis.

M Constanza Camargo, Yasuyuki Goto, Jovanny Zabaleta, Douglas R Morgan, Pelayo Correa, Charles S Rabkin

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 166 papers, 13 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
166citing papers in PubMed, 13 pooled it
12.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

166 citing papers in PubMed, 13 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 283 citations in OpenAlex.

  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. Predictive Factors for Lymph Node Metastasis in Undifferentiated Early Gastric Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2017
    Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Article
  17. Sex and Gender Perspective in Obesity and Gastric Cancer.The world journal of men's health · 2026
    Review
  18. Uncovering hypothesis-generating associations between prescription drugs and digestive cancer risk: a case-control drug-wide association study (DWAS).Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2026
    Article
  19. Updating the Prevalence ofJournal of clinical medicine · 2026
    Article
  20. Adherence to pro-vegetarian dietary patterns and gastric cancer risk: a pooled analysis of the StoP Consortium.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2026
    Article

106 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

M Constanza CamargoInfections and Immunoepidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, 6120 Executive Blvd, EPS/6116, Rockville, MD 20852, USA. camargomc@mail.nih.gov
Yasuyuki Goto
Jovanny Zabaleta
Douglas R Morgan
Pelayo Correa
Charles S Rabkin
Nagoya University · JPDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and GeneticsLouisiana State University Health Sciences Center New Orleans · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Molecular mechanisms of infection-related cancerZIACP010212 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI ENGELS, ERIC A · 2010 to 2025
$4.6M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999NCI NIH HHS Y99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Estrogens may influence gastric cancer risk, but published studies are inconclusive. We therefore carried out a meta-analysis addressing the associations of gastric cancer in women with menstrual and reproductive factors and with use of estrogen- and antiestrogen-related therapies. Searches of PubMed up to June, 2011 and review of citations yielded a total of 28 independent studies, including at least one exposure of interest. Random effects pooled estimates of relative risk (RR) and corresponding 95% CIs were calculated for eight exposures reported in at least five studies, including: age at menarche, age at menopause, years of fertility, parity, age at first birth, oral contraceptive use, hormone replacement therapy (HRT), and tamoxifen treatment. Longer years of fertility (RR = 0.74, 95% CI: 0.63-0.86) and HRT (RR = 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64-0.92) were each associated with decreased gastric cancer risk. Conversely, tamoxifen treatment was associated with increased risk (RR = 1.82; 95% CI: 1.39-2.38). The other five exposures were not significantly associated. Our analysis supports the hypothesis that longer exposure to estrogen effects of either ovarian or exogenous origin may decrease risk of gastric cancer. Additional studies are warranted to extend this finding and to identify the underlying mechanisms.

Indexed as

Estrogen Replacement TherapyFemaleGonadal Steroid HormonesHumansReproductive HistoryRisk FactorsStomach NeoplasmsGonadal Steroid Hormones

Identifiers

PMID22028402
PMCPMC3315355
OpenAlexW2098745472

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.