Chronic inflammation towards cancer incidence: A systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological studies

Nathalie Michels, Carola van Aart, Jens Morisse, Amy Mullee, Inge Huybrechts

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

60 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This systematic review and meta-analysis provides epidemiological data on the relationship between chronic inflammation, as measured by inflammatory blood parameters, and cancer incidence. Two independent researchers searched PubMed, Web Of Science and Embase databases until October 2020. In vitro studies, animal studies, studies with chronically-ill subjects or cross-sectional studies were excluded. Quality was assessed with the Newcastle–Ottawa scale. The 59 nested case-control, 6 nested case-cohort and 42 prospective cohort studies considered 119 different inflammatory markers (top three: CRP, fibrinogen and IL6) and 26 cancer types (top five: colorectal, lung, breast, overall and prostate cancer). Nineteen meta-analyses resulted in ten significant positive associations: CRP-breast (OR = 1.23[1.05–1.43];HR = 1.14[1.01–1.28)), CRP-colorectal (OR = 1.34[1.11–1.60]), CRP-lung (HR = 2.03[1.59–2.60]), fibrinogen-lung (OR = 2.56[1.86–3.54]), IL6-lung (OR = 1.41[1.12–1.78]), CRP-ovarian (OR = 1.41[1.10–1.80]), CRP-prostate (HR = 1.09[1.03–1.15]), CRP-overall (HR = 1.35[1.16–1.57]) and fibrinogen-overall (OR = 1.22[1.07–1.39]). Study quality improvements can be done by better verification of inflammatory status (more than one baseline measurement of one parameter), adjusting for important confounders and ensuring long-term follow-up.

Original languageEnglish
Article number103177
JournalCritical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology
Volume157
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2021
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Cancer
  • Cytokines
  • Inflammatory markers
  • Observational studies
  • Systematic review

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Chronic inflammation towards cancer incidence: A systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiological studies'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this