Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22648201›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of nutrition2013

Glycemic index, glycemic load and endometrial cancer risk: results from the Australian National Endometrial Cancer study and an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Christina M Nagle, Catherine M Olsen, Torukiri I Ibiebele, Amanda B Spurdle, Penelope M Webb, Astralian National Endometrial Cancer Study Group, Astralian Ovarian Cancer Study Group

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of nutrition, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Addressing the Role of Obesity in Endometrial Cancer Risk, Prevention, and Treatment.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2016
    Review
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

7 authors.

Christina M NagleGynaecological Cancers, Population Health Research Department, Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Royal Brisbane Hospital, Herston, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Christina.Nagle@qimr.edu.au
Catherine M Olsen
Torukiri I Ibiebele
Amanda B Spurdle
Penelope M Webb
Astralian National Endometrial Cancer Study Group
Astralian Ovarian Cancer Study Group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe relationship between habitual consumption of foods with a high glycemic index (GI) and/or a diet with a high glycemic load (GL) and risk of endometrial cancer is uncertain, and relatively few studies have investigated these associations. The objectives of this study were to examine the association between GI/GL and risk of endometrial cancer using data from an Australian population-based case-control study and systematically review all the available evidence to quantify the magnitude of the association using meta-analysis.

methodsThe case-control study included 1,290 women aged 18-79 years with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed endometrial cancer and 1,436 population controls. Controls were selected to match the expected Australian state of residence and age distribution (in 5-year bands) of cases. For the systematic review, relevant studies were identified by searching PubMed and Embase databases through to July 2011. Random-effects models were used to calculate the summary risk estimates, overall and dose-response.

resultsIn our case-control study, we observed a modest positive association between high dietary GI (OR 1.43, 95 % CI 1.11-1.83) and risk of endometrial cancer, but no association with high dietary GL (OR 1.15, 95 % CI 0.90-1.48). For the meta-analysis, we collated information from six cohort and two case-control studies, involving a total of 5,569 cases. The pooled OR for the highest versus the lowest intake category of GI was 1.15 (0.95-1.40); however, there was significant heterogeneity (p 0.004) by study design (RR 1.00 [95 % CI 0.87-1.14] for cohort studies and 1.56 [95 % CI 1.21-2.02] for case-control studies). There was no association in the dose-response meta-analysis of GI (RR per 5 unit/day increment of GI 1.00, 95 % CI 0.97-1.03). GL was positively associated with endometrial cancer. The pooled RR for the highest versus the lowest GL intake was 1.21 (95 % CI 1.09-1.33) and 1.06 (95 % CI 1.01-1.11) per 50 unit/day increment of GL in the dose-response meta-analysis.

conclusionThe pooled results from observational studies, including our case-control results, provide evidence of a modest positive association between high GL, but not GI, and endometrial cancer risk.

Indexed as

DietGlycemic IndexAdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaBlood GlucoseCase-Control StudiesDatabases, FactualDietary CarbohydratesEndometrial NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMiddle AgedRisk FactorsYoung AdultBlood GlucoseDietary Carbohydrates

Identifiers

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.