Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34918023›Full record

SynthesisAdvances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.)2022

Body Composition and Prostate Cancer Risk: A Systematic Review of Observational Studies.

Sarah A Purcell, Camila L P Oliveira, Michelle Mackenzie, Paula Robson, John D Lewis, Carla M Prado

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Subcutaneous adipose tissue outperforms muscle strength as an indicator of survival and quality of life in patients with cancer: a multicenter cohort study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Sarah A PurcellAgricultural, Food, and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Camila L P OliveiraAgricultural, Food, and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Michelle MackenzieAgricultural, Food, and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Paula RobsonCancer Care Alberta and the Cancer Strategic Clinical Network, Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
John D LewisDepartment of Experimental Oncology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Carla M PradoAgricultural, Food, and Nutritional Science, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
University of Alberta · CAAlberta Health Services · CA

Funding

CIHR
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Body composition parameters are not captured by measures of body mass, which may explain inconsistent associations between body weight and prostate cancer (PC) risk. The objective of this systematic review was to characterize the association between fat mass (FM) and fat-free mass (FFM) parameters and PC risk. A search of PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science identified case-control and cohort studies that measured body composition in relation to PC risk. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Thirteen observational studies were included, of which 8 were case-control studies (n = 1572 cases, n = 1937 controls) and 5 were prospective cohort studies (n = 7854 incident cases with PC). The NOS score was 5.9 ± 1.1 for case-control studies and 8.4 ± 1.3 for cohort studies. The most common body composition technique was bioelectrical impedance analysis (n = 9 studies), followed by DXA (n = 2), computed tomography (n = 2), air displacement plethysmography (n = 1), and MRI (n = 1). No case-control studies reported differences in %FM between PC cases and controls and no consistent differences in FM or FFM (in kilograms) were observed. Two out of 5 cohort studies reported that higher %FM was associated with lower PC risk. Conversely, 3 cohort studies reported a greater risk of being diagnosed with advanced/aggressive PC with higher FM (expressed in kilograms, %FM, or fat distribution). Two out of 4 studies (both case-control and cohort) found that higher abdominal adipose tissue was associated with increased PC risk. In conclusion, although results were inconsistent, there is some evidence that FM may be negatively associated with total PC risk but positively associated with the risk of advanced/aggressive PC; modest evidence suggests that abdominal adipose tissue may increase the risk of PC. Future work should elucidate unique patterns of FM distribution and PC risk to triage men at risk for developing PC. This study protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database as CRD42019133388.

Indexed as

Adipose TissueProstatic NeoplasmsAbsorptiometry, PhotonBody CompositionBody Mass IndexElectric ImpedanceHumansMaleObservational Studies as TopicProspective Studiesadipositycancercarcinomamusclenutrition assessmentobesity

Identifiers

PMID34918023
PMCPMC9340980
OpenAlexW4200230696

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.