ArticleLipids in health and disease2020
Bidirectional association between serum carcinoembryonic antigen and metabolic syndrome among the Chinese male population: two cohort studies.
Article in Lipids in health and disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between serum carcinoembryonic antigen and cardiometabolic risks: Implication for cardiometabolic prevention.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposePrevious studies have shown that serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is independently associated with metabolic syndrome (MetS). However, these studies were mainly cross-sectional analyses, and cause was not clarified. In the present study, two bidirectional cohort studies were conducted to investigate the bidirectional associations between CEA and MetS using a Chinese male sample cohort.
methodsThe initial longitudinal cohort included 9629 Chinese males enrolled from January 2010 to December 2015. Two bidirectional cohorts were conducted in the study: subcohort A (from CEA to MetS, n = 6439) included participants without MetS at baseline to estimate the risk of developing incident MetS; subcohort B (from MetS to CEA, n = 8533) included participants without an elevated CEA level (Hyper-CEA) at baseline to examine the risk of developing incident Hyper-CEA. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models.
resultsIn subcohort A, the incidence densities of MetS among participants with and without Hyper-CEA were 84.56 and 99.28 per 1000 person-years, respectively. No significant effects of Hyper-CEA on incident MetS were observed in subcohort A (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.12; P = 0.326). In subcohort B, a higher incidence density of Hyper-CEA was found among participants with MetS (33.42 and 29.13 per 1000 person-years for those with and without MetS, respectively). For nonsmoking participants aged > 65 years, MetS increased the risk of incident Hyper-CEA (HR, 1.87; 95% CI, 1.09 to 3.20; P = 0.022).
conclusionFor the direction of CEA on incident MetS, no significant association was observed. For the direction of MetS on incident Hyper-CEA, MetS in nonsmoking elderly men could increase the risk of incident Hyper-CEA, while this association was not found in other stratified participants. The clinical implications of the association between CEA and MetS should be interpreted with caution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.