ArticleCureus2026
Unpacking the Obesity Paradox in Lung Cancer: A Nationwide Analysis of In-Hospital Mortality From the US National Inpatient Sample (2020-2022).
Article in Cureus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Although obesity is an established risk factor for multiple malignancies, numerous studies have reported an "obesity paradox," wherein patients with obesity demonstrate improved survival compared with normal-weight or underweight individuals. Whether this survival advantage reflects a true protective biological mechanism or methodological artifacts such as reverse causation driven by cancer cachexia and selection bias remains controversial, particularly within the acute inpatient setting. We evaluated the independent association between documented obesity and in-hospital mortality among lung cancer hospitalizations. Methods We performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the US National Inpatient Sample (2020-2022). Adult hospitalizations (age ≥18 years) with a diagnosis of lung cancer were identified and dichotomized by the presence or absence of an International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) obesity code; the unit of analysis was the hospitalization rather than the individual patient, and the exposure was documented obesity coding rather than measured adiposity. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and in-hospital complications were compared using the chi-squared test (categorical variables) and the Mann-Whitney U test (continuous variables). The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; multivariable logistic regression adjusted for demographic, clinical, and hospital-level covariates. Results Of 61,963 unweighted lung cancer hospitalizations, 7,065 (11.4%) carried an obesity code. Obese patients were younger (median: 68 vs. 70 years) and more often female (4,090/7,065 (57.9%) vs. 28,011/54,898 (51%)). They had a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and obstructive sleep apnea (1,703 (24.1%) vs. 2,910 (5.3%)) but a lower weighted Elixhauser score (median: 10 vs. 16). In-hospital mortality was lower in the obese group (278 (3.9%) vs. 3,746 (6.8%); p<0.001). After adjustment, an obesity code was independently associated with 33% lower odds of in-hospital death (adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 0.67; 95% CI: 0.58-0.77; p<0.001). Conclusions Documented obesity coding was independently associated with lower in-hospital mortality among lung cancer hospitalizations. However, the low sensitivity of administrative obesity coding, a binary exposure that cannot separate normal-weight from cachectic patients, and the susceptibility of hospitalized cohorts to collider and reverse-causation bias mean this association should not be interpreted as a protective effect of adiposity. The paradox is most parsimoniously explained by confounding by illness severity rather than a therapeutic target, and the finding should be interpreted as an association involving documented obesity coding rather than an effect of adiposity itself.
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.