Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33010525›Full record

SynthesisJournal of sport and health science2021

Association between physical activity and digestive-system cancer: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Fangfang Xie, Yanli You, Jihan Huang, Chong Guan, Ziji Chen, Min Fang, Fei Yao, Jia Han

Open access · diamondAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of sport and health science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

40 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 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. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Fangfang XieSchool of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 201203, China.
Yanli YouDepartment of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Changhai Hospital, Naval Medical University, Shanghai 200433, China.
Jihan HuangCenter for Drug Clinical Research, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 201203, China.
Chong GuanSchool of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 201203, China.
Ziji ChenSchool of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 201203, China.
Min FangSchool of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 201203, China.
Fei YaoSchool of Acupuncture-Moxibustion and Tuina, Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Shanghai 201203, China. Electronic address: doctoryaofei@126.com.
Jia HanDepartment of Physiotherapy and Sport Rehabilitation, Shanghai University of Sport, Shanghai 200438, China. Electronic address: Jia.Han@canberra.edu.au.
Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine · CNSecond Military Medical University · CNShanghai University of Sport · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPhysical activity (PA) may have an impact on digestive-system cancer (DSC) by improving insulin sensitivity and anticancer immune function and by reducing the exposure of the digestive tract to carcinogens by stimulating gastrointestinal motility, thus reducing transit time. The current study aimed to determine the effect of PA on different types of DSC via a systematic review and meta-analysis.

methodsIn accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched for relevant studies in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure. Using a random effects model, the relationship between PA and different types of DSC was analyzed.

resultsThe data used for meta-analysis were derived from 161 risk estimates in 47 studies involving 5,797,768 participants and 55,162 cases. We assessed the pooled associations between high vs. low PA levels and the risk of DSC (risk ratio (RR)  = 0.82, 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.79-0.85), colon cancer (RR = 0.81, 95%CI: 0.76-0.87), rectal cancer (RR = 0.88, 95%CI: 0.80-0.98), colorectal cancer (RR = 0.77, 95%CI: 0.69-0.85), gallbladder cancer (RR = 0.79, 95%CI: 0.64-0.98), gastric cancer (RR = 0.83, 95%CI: 0.76-0.91), liver cancer (RR = 0.73, 0.60-0.89), oropharyngeal cancer (RR = 0.79, 95%CI: 0.72-0.87), and pancreatic cancer (RR = 0.85, 95%CI: 0.78-0.93). The findings were comparable between case-control studies (RR = 0.73, 95%CI: 0.68-0.78) and prospective cohort studies (RR = 0.88, 95%CI: 0.80-0.91). The meta-analysis of 9 studies reporting low, moderate, and high PA levels, with 17 risk estimates, showed that compared to low PA, moderate PA may also reduce the risk of DSC (RR = 0.89, 95%CI: 0.80-1.00), while compared to moderate PA, high PA seemed to slightly increase the risk of DSC, although the results were not statistically significant (RR = 1.11, 95%CI: 0.94-1.32). In addition, limited evidence from 5 studies suggested that meeting the international PA guidelines might not significantly reduce the risk of DSC (RR = 0.96, 95%CI: 0.91-1.02).

conclusionCompared to previous research, this systematic review has provided more comprehensive information about the inverse relationship between PA and DSC risk. The updated evidence from the current meta-analysis indicates that a moderate-to-high PA level is a common protective factor that can significantly lower the overall risk of DSC. However, the reduction rate for specific cancers may vary. In addition, limited evidence suggests that meeting the international PA guidelines might not significantly reduce the risk of DSC. Thus, future studies must be conducted to determine the optimal dosage, frequency, intensity, and duration of PA required to reduce DSC risk effectively.

Indexed as

BiasCase-Control StudiesConfidence IntervalsDigestive System NeoplasmsExerciseGastrointestinal MotilityGastrointestinal TransitGuideline AdherenceHumansInsulin ResistanceLife StyleProspective StudiesRisk FactorsDigestive-system cancerMeta-analysisPhysical activity

Identifiers

PMID33010525
PMCPMC7856558
OpenAlexW3089969007

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.