Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27861759›Full record

ArticleCancer2017

Metabolic syndrome and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma in elderly patients in the United States: An analysis of SEER-Medicare data.

Jennifer Drahos, Winnie Ricker, Ruth M Pfeiffer, Michael B Cook

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.1field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Circulating Inflammation Biomarkers and the Risk of Esophageal Adenocarcinoma: A Nested Case-Control Study in the Department of Defense Serum Repository.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Chemoprevention of esophageal adenocarcinoma.Gastroenterology report · 2020
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jennifer DrahosDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland.ORCID 0000-0002-8454-9863
Winnie RickerInformation Management Services, Rockville, Maryland.
Ruth M PfeifferDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland.
Michael B CookDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Rockville, Maryland.
National Institutes of Health · USInformation Management Services · US

Funding

Barretts EsophagusZIACP010220 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI ABNET, CHRISTIAN · 2011 to 2025
$4.5M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 CA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMetabolic syndrome (MetS) is associated with cancer risk and increases the risk of Barrett esophagus, which is the precursor lesion of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EA), primarily in the absence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). However, to the authors' knowledge, little is known regarding whether MetS is associated with the risk of EA.

methodsUsing the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare-linked database, the authors evaluated whether MetS was associated with EA. A total of 3167 cases of EA were compared with individually matched population controls (5:1); a subset of 575 EA cases were able to be individually matched with 575 Barrett esophagus controls. MetS was defined using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes in the period 1 to 3 years before the diagnosis of EA or control selection. Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Potential effect modification by GERD symptoms and sex was examined in stratified models.

resultsEA was found to be significantly associated with MetS (odds ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-1.26) compared with population controls. In males, the association was restricted to those individuals without prior GERD; however, in females, MetS was found to be associated with EA regardless of GERD status. Effect modification by sex was observed (P for interaction = .01). MetS was not found to be associated with EA risk when compared with Barrett esophagus controls.

conclusionsIn this older population, MetS was found to be associated with an increased risk of EA in males without GERD and females regardless of GERD status. Given the lack of an association when compared with Barrett esophagus controls, MetS may impact EA risk by primarily increasing the risk of the precursor lesion, Barrett esophagus. Cancer 2017;123:657-665. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Indexed as

AdenocarcinomaAgedBarrett EsophagusDatabases, FactualEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleMedicareMetabolic SyndromeRisk FactorsSEER ProgramUnited StatesBarrett esophagusesophageal cancergastroesophageal refluxobesityrisk factors

Identifiers

PMID27861759
PMCPMC6059808
OpenAlexW2551184913

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.