Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34508247›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Cancer2021

Stress and cancer: mechanisms, significance and future directions.

Anabel Eckerling, Itay Ricon-Becker, Liat Sorski, Elad Sandbank, Shamgar Ben-Eliyahu

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 199 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
199citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
29.5field-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

199 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 308 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. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Prognostic significance of dynamic emotional distress during neoadjuvant therapy and surgery for resectable non-small cell lung cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

139 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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Anabel EckerlingSagol School of Neuroscience and School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6530-9346
Itay Ricon-BeckerSagol School of Neuroscience and School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8440-1634
Liat SorskiSagol School of Neuroscience and School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2087-1984
Elad SandbankSagol School of Neuroscience and School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3374-5052
Shamgar Ben-EliyahuSagol School of Neuroscience and School of Psychological Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel. shamgar@tauex.tau.ac.il.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3832-0678
Tel Aviv University · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The notion that stress and cancer are interlinked has dominated lay discourse for decades. More recent animal studies indicate that stress can substantially facilitate cancer progression through modulating most hallmarks of cancer, and molecular and systemic mechanisms mediating these effects have been elucidated. However, available clinical evidence for such deleterious effects is inconsistent, as epidemiological and stress-reducing clinical interventions have yielded mixed effects on cancer mortality. In this Review, we describe and discuss specific mediating mechanisms identified by preclinical research, and parallel clinical findings. We explain the discrepancy between preclinical and clinical outcomes, through pointing to experimental strengths leveraged by animal studies and through discussing methodological and conceptual obstacles that prevent clinical studies from reflecting the impacts of stress. We suggest approaches to circumvent such obstacles, based on targeting critical phases of cancer progression that are more likely to be stress-sensitive; pharmacologically limiting adrenergic-inflammatory responses triggered by medical procedures; and focusing on more vulnerable populations, employing personalized pharmacological and psychosocial approaches. Recent clinical trials support our hypothesis that psychological and/or pharmacological inhibition of excess adrenergic and/or inflammatory stress signalling, especially alongside cancer treatments, could save lives.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsAnimalsHumans

Identifiers

PMID34508247
OpenAlexW3196865736

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.