Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34808291›Full record

ArticleBrain, behavior, and immunity2022

The gut connection: Intestinal permeability as a pathway from breast cancer survivors' relationship satisfaction to inflammation across treatment.

M Rosie Shrout, Annelise A Madison, Megan E Renna, Catherine M Alfano, Stephen P Povoski, Adele M Lipari, Doreen M Agnese, William E Carson, William B Malarkey, Michael T Bailey and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Brain, behavior, and immunity, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. 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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

M Rosie ShroutDepartment of Human Development and Family Studies, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA; Center on Aging and the Life Course, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA. Electronic address: shrout@purdue.edu.
Annelise A MadisonInstitute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA.
Megan E RennaSchool of Psychology, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, USA.
Catherine M AlfanoNorthwell Health Cancer Institute, New York, NY, USA.
Stephen P PovoskiComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA.
Adele M LipariComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA.
Doreen M AgneseComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA.
William E CarsonComprehensive Cancer Center, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA.
William B MalarkeyInstitute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Internal Medicine, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA.
Michael T BaileyInstitute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Pediatrics, The Ohio State College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Center for Microbial Pathogenesis, The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA; Oral and Gastrointestinal Microbiology Research Affinity Group, The Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA.
Janice K Kiecolt-GlaserInstitute for Behavioral Medicine Research, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Health, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA.
The Ohio State University · USInstitute for Behavioral Medicine · USNorthwell Health · USPurdue University West Lafayette · USUniversity of Southern Mississippi · US

Funding

Translational Therapeutics Research Program (TT)P30CA016058 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Jennifer A. Woyach · 1985 to 2026
$132.3M
Fatigue, Depression, and Inflammation in Cancer Survivors: A Prospective StudyR01CA131029 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI KIECOLT-GLASER, JANICE · 2008 to 2013
$4.1M
Training Program For Cancer Prevention and ControlT32CA229114 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Chyke Abadama Doubeni, Peter G. Shields · 2018 to 2026
$2.0M
NRSA Training CoreTL1TR002735 · NCATS · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI BUMGARDNER, GINNY L, KIRSCHNER, LAWRENCE S · 2018 to 2022
$1.3M
Biobehavioral Influences on Cancer: Perspectives from PsychoneuroimmunologyK05CA172296 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI KIECOLT-GLASER, JANICE · 2013 to 2017
$426k
NCATS NIH HHS TL1 TR002735NCI NIH HHS K05 CA172296NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016058NCI NIH HHS R01 CA131029NCI NIH HHS T32 CA229114
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundBreast cancer survivors are prone to weakened gut barriers, allowing bacteria to migrate into the blood stream. Gut permeability fuels inflammation, which, among survivors, can elevate risk for comorbid disease development, cancer recurrence, and a poor quality of life; however, survivors' satisfying relationships can provide health benefits. This longitudinal study used a conceptual model addressing how intimate relationships is associated with health through changes in gut permeability and inflammation.

methodBreast cancer survivors (n = 139, stages 0-IIIC) completed a baseline visit before treatment and two follow-up visits 6 and 18 months after treatment ended. Women who had an abnormal breast cancer test followed by a benign diagnosis completed visits within a comparable timeframe (noncancer patient controls; n = 69). All women completed questionnaires assessing their relationship satisfaction and provided blood samples to assess two bacterial endotoxin biomarkers, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) and soluble CD14 (sCD14), as well as C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin 6 (IL-6).

resultsWithin-person multilevel mediation analyses showed that when a survivor's relationship satisfaction was higher than usual, her own LBP and LBP/sCD14 were lower, which was associated with lower than her own average CRP and IL-6 (95% CIs [-0.0104, -0.0002]). IL-6 was also higher when older survivors, but not younger survivors, experienced higher than usual intestinal permeability (p = .001). These effects of satisfying relationships held after accounting for cancer-related and behavioral factors. Post-hoc analyses showed LBP, sCD14, and LBP/sCD14 were associated with CRP for the cancer survivors, but only LBP and LBP/sCD14 were linked to CRP among the noncancer control patients.

conclusionThe gut environment is a new promising candidate for understanding a relationship's long-term health impact, particularly among those with elevated health risks. Survivors may reap multiple physiological benefits from satisfying relationships.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsCancer SurvivorsFemaleHumansInflammationLongitudinal StudiesNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPermeabilityPersonal SatisfactionQuality of LifeSurvivorsCancer survivorsGut microbiotaInflammationIntestinal permeabilityMarriageRomantic relationships

Identifiers

PMID34808291
PMCPMC8769505
OpenAlexW3216817730

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.