ArticleJournal of sport and health science2023
Non-exercise estimated cardiorespiratory fitness and cancer incidence: The NIH-AARP diet and health study.
Article in Journal of sport and health science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Spatiotemporal dynamics of the host-tumor metabolic interface: Implications for precision nutritional oncology.Genes & diseases · 2026Review
- Nonexercise estimated cardiorespiratory fitness in relation to incidence of urinary tract, bladder and kidney cancer in the HUNT study.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Unraveling the link between cardiorespiratory fitness and cancer: a state-of-the-art review.GeroScience · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNon-exercise estimated cardiorespiratory fitness (NEE-CRF) has been shown to be associated with mortality, although its association with cancer incidence is unknown. The study aimed to assess the prospective association between NEE-CRF and cancer incidence in a large cohort of men and women.
methodsThe National Institutes of Health-American Association of Retired Persons diet and health study is a prospective cohort that included 402,548 participants aged 50-71 years who were free from cancer at baseline (1995-1996) (men (n = 238,835) and women (n = 163,713)) and were followed until December 31, 2015. The exposure variable was NEE-CRF expressed in metabolic equivalents. NEE-CRF was estimated using a validated equation of self-reported predictors on demographics and lifestyle behaviors derived from baseline questionnaires. Primary outcomes were total cancer incidence and incidence of prostate, breast, lung, and colorectal cancers. Cox proportional hazards models were analyzed for the association between NEE-CRF and cancer incidence outcomes adjusted for established cancer risk factors.
resultsDuring 13.7 ± 3.2 years of follow-up (mean ± SD), 64,344 men and 31,315 women developed a new cancer. For every 1-metabolic equivalent higher NEE-CRF, the hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (95%CIs) were 0.96 (95%CI: 0.94-0.97) and 0.88 (95%CI: 0.84-0.92) of total and colorectal cancer incidence among men, and 0.95 (95%CI: 0.93-0.97) and 0.94 (95%CI: 0.91-0.97) of total and breast cancer incidence among women, respectively (all p < 0.001). NEE-CRF was not associated with incidence of prostate and lung cancers in men or colorectal and lung cancers in women.
conclusionThese results suggest that higher CRF levels, as assessed by the applied non-exercise estimated method, may provide preventive benefits against the development of cancer, while low CRF could potentially serve as a modifiable cancer risk factor. Integrating NEE-CRF into screening paradigms and referring low-fit individuals to improve CRF could complement the public health prevention strategy against cancer.
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.