ReviewCancers2022
Association between Energy Balance-Related Factors and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Ovarian Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Cancers, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Disrupting oncogenic signaling in triple negative breast cancer: The interplay of Cx43, Pyk2, and Src in MDA-MB-231 cells.Cell and tissue research · 2026Article
- Investigating the Prognostic Value of Pretreatment Body Composition in Women with Ovarian Cancer: Impact on Clinical Outcomes.Cancers · 2026Article
- Exploring awareness, perceptions, and practices relating to nutritional status and low muscle mass in patients with ovarian cancer.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025Article
- Evaluation of alternative prognostic thresholds for SP142 and 22C3 immunohistochemical PD-L1 expression in triple-negative breast cancer: results from a population-based cohort.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2025Observational
- Possible Prognostic Role of BMI Before Chemotherapy in the Outcomes of Women with Ovarian Cancer.Nutrients · 2025Article
- Unveiling the causal link between metabolic factors and ovarian cancer risk using Mendelian randomization analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Whole-Body Composition Features by Computed Tomography in Ovarian Cancer: Pilot Data on Survival Correlations.Cancers · 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis synthesized evidence in patients with ovarian cancer at diagnosis and/or during first-line treatment on; (i) the association of body weight, body composition, diet, exercise, sedentary behavior, or physical fitness with clinical outcomes; and (ii) the effect of exercise and/or dietary interventions. Methods: Risk of bias assessments and best-evidence syntheses were completed. Meta-analyses were performed when ≥3 papers presented point estimates and variability measures of associations or effects. Results: Body mass index (BMI) at diagnosis was not significantly associated with survival. Although the following trends were not supported by the best-evidence syntheses, the meta-analyses revealed that a higher BMI was associated with a higher risk of post-surgical complications (n = 5, HR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.06−2.51, p = 0.030), a higher muscle mass was associated with a better progression-free survival (n = 3, HR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.04−1.91, p = 0.030) and a higher muscle density was associated with a better overall survival (n = 3, HR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.62−2.79, p < 0.001). Muscle measures were not significantly associated with surgical or chemotherapy-related outcomes. Conclusions: The prognostic value of baseline BMI for clinical outcomes is limited, but muscle mass and density may have more prognostic potential. High-quality studies with comprehensive reporting of results are required to improve our understanding of the prognostic value of body composition measures for clinical outcomes. Systematic review registration number: PROSPERO identifier CRD42020163058.
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.