Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • "Best of" Collection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Research
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • "Best of" Collection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

Review

Body Mass Index, Prostate Cancer–Specific Mortality, and Biochemical Recurrence: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Yin Cao and Jing Ma
Yin Cao
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jing Ma
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-10-0229 Published April 2011
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Increasing evidence suggested obesity, measured by body mass index (BMI), was associated with prostate cancer–specific mortality, and its impact on biochemical recurrence was also inconclusive. We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and bibliographies of retrieved studies up to January 5, 2010. We used random-effects meta-analysis to assess the relative risks (RR) of prostate cancer-specific mortality and biochemical recurrence associated with a 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI. Among the six population-based cohort studies in 1,263,483 initially cancer-free men, 6,817 prostate cancer deaths occurred; a 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI was associated with 15% (RR: 1.15, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06–1.25, P < 0.01) higher risk of dying of prostate cancer. In the six postdiagnosis survival studies on 18,203 patients with 932 prostate cancer deaths, a 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI was associated with 20% higher prostate cancer–specific mortality (RR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.99–1.46, P = 0.06). In the sixteen studies which followed 26,479 prostate cancer patients after primary treatment, a 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI was significantly associated with 21% increased risk of biochemical recurrence (RR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.11–1.31 P < 0.01). Elevated BMI is associated with risk of prostate cancer–specific mortality in prospective cohort studies and biochemical recurrence in prostate cancer patients. Its association with prostate cancer–specific mortality in diagnosed patients needs to be further evaluated. Cancer Prev Res; 4(4); 486–501. ©2011 AACR.

Introduction

Obesity, a growing epidemic in all over the world, has been linked to mortality of several cancers (1), but only in the past 5 to 10 years, body mass index (BMI) as a surrogate of adiposity has been extensively evaluated for prostate cancer incidence and mortality.

Higher BMI in mid/late adult life is weakly associated with higher risk of incident prostate cancer (2), but recently, the pattern that obesity is associated with lower risk of low-grade prostate cancer and higher risk of aggressive prostate cancer has emerged (2–5). Increasing evidence suggested that higher BMI is associated with poorer outcomes, that is, higher risk of prostate cancer–specific mortality among both obese healthy adults (4, 6–8) and prostate cancer patients (9–13) and higher rates of biochemical recurrence among diagnosed patients (14–16); however, no systematic review data are available about the impact of obesity and overweight on prostate cancer progression.

It is crucial to review and evaluate the magnitude that obesity affects mortality and recurrence of prostate cancer, as proper management of this modifiable lifestyle factor may help improve prostate cancer outcomes. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis to quantitatively summarize the association between BMI and risk of dying of prostate cancer in initially cancer-free men, prostate cancer–specific mortality among the diagnosed, and biochemical recurrence in the treated.

Material and Methods

Search strategy

This systematic review was conducted according to the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines (17). We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE to identify relevant articles on human subjects that were written in English from the inception of each database to January 5, 2010, using the key words related to obesity (“obesity,” “overweight,” “body weight,” “body mass index,” “BMI,” “weight,” “body size,” “adiposity”) combined with specific terms on prostate cancer mortality or biochemical recurrence (“prostate cancer” and “mortality,” “survival,” “death,” “prognosis,” “progression” or “recurrence’). Bibliographies of retrieved articles were also searched.

Eligibility criteria

The eligibility of each study was assessed independently by 2 investigators (Y.C., J.M.). We included only cohort studies of mid/late life BMI and prostate cancer–specific mortality (prostate cancer as the underlying cause of death) and clinical studies of BMI and biochemical recurrence after treatment. We excluded reviews, editorials, meta-analysis, animal studies or in vitro studies, and non-English written studies. Among the 40 studies we carried out a full-text review on, we excluded studies conducted among patients with metastatic prostate cancer (18, 19), using a broader definition of progression rather than biochemical recurrence (20) and in which BMI was not used to measure obesity (21, 22). For studies previously published on the same database (23–25), we included only the most recent findings (16, 26).

We included studies that reported standardized forms of relative risk (RR), risk ratio, hazard ratio, or odds ratio, with estimates on confidence interval (CI), and used RRs to represent various effect estimates. We excluded studies failing to report these estimates (27–30) or presenting only univariate estimates (31, 32).

Data extraction

Data extraction was conducted independently by 2 investigators (Y.C., J.M.), using a standardized data extraction form. For each included article, we extracted information on the title, authors, journal and publication year, study design, study population and setting, duration of follow-up, BMI categories, definition of biochemical recurrence, number of outcomes, the most adjusted effect estimates, and covariates controlled in multivariable analysis. For studies that presented findings from more than 1 database, we extracted only the most recent update from each of the databases (8, 33).

Statistical analysis

We analyzed BMI as a continuous variable by first transforming all the RR estimates to the corresponding RRs for every 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI, with the assumption that the risk increment is constant, and also allowed for a fair comparison among studies using different BMI categories.

Whenever RR per kg/m2 increase in BMI and its 95% CI were available, we used them to estimate the RR and 95% CI for every 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI. Category-specific RRs were converted into RRs associated with every 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI by the use of either generalized least-squares for trend estimation whenever person-time data were available or weighted least-squares method when only counts of death were available (34, 35). The value assigned to each BMI category was the midpoint for closed categories and was adjusted for half range of the neighborhood categories when categories were open ended. In 3 studies for which BMI was only divided into 2 open-ended categories, we assumed that the RR and CI estimate for the higher BMI category was similar to estimates for a 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI (15, 36, 37). We validated such methods in studies which presented RRs for both continuous and categorical BMI and found that the RR per kg/m2 increase obtained by conversion was similar to the RR for continuous BMI shown in the article (11).

We pooled all the RRs for a 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI by DerSimonian–Laired random-effect meta-analysis (38) and assessed the heterogeneity between studies by Q and I2 statistics. Sensitivity analysis was conducted by omitting one study at a time, generating the pooled estimates and comparing with the original estimates. Stratified meta-analysis was carried out by country of study, BMI measurement, definition of biochemical recurrence, and specific treatment type among patients treated with radiation therapy. Funnel plots and both Begg's and Egger's tests were used to evaluate publication bias. We also calculated population attributable risk percent (PAR%) among diagnosed prostate cancer patients by using available category specific RRs, based on prevalence of overweight and obesity of U.S. males 60 years and older from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2007–2008 (39).

All analyses were done using STATA version 10.0 statistical software (Stata). All statistical comparisons were 2-sided, and a value P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

Data extracted and quality

Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these studies, 12 evaluated BMI and prostate cancer–specific mortality (1, 4, 6–13, 40, 41) and 16 assessed biochemical recurrence after primary treatment (Fig. 1; refs. 12–16, 26, 33, 36, 37, 42–48). Two (12, 13) studies presented findings on both outcomes and therefore were included in both the meta-analyses of mortality and biochemical recurrence.

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Selection of studies for meta-analysis.

Six of the 12 studies of prostate cancer–specific mortality were population-based cohort studies conducted among volunteers in the United States and Europe (1, 4, 6–8, 40). A total of 1,263,483 initially cancer-free men were prospectively followed up for an average of more than 10 years, except one with 5.5 years (4), and 6,817 men died of prostate cancer (Table 1). BMI was self-reported, measured, or retrieved from medical records at study enrollment. All the studies had controlled for smoking status.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Characteristics of identified studies on BMI and prostate cancer–specific mortality (N = 12)

The other 6 studies (9–13, 41) followed the survival of 18,203 diagnosed prostate cancer patients in the United States and the Netherlands; 932 prostate cancer deaths were found. Prostate cancer patients were identified from population-based case–control or cohort studies (10, 11) or various clinical settings (9, 12, 13, 41). Four studies had an average follow-up of more than 7 years, but the 2 largest studies had only 4 years of follow-up (13, 41). The 2 population-based studies assessed BMI by self-report either 1 year before diagnosis (10) or at the study entrance years before diagnosis (11). Three clinical studies measured BMI at the time of first treatment (9, 12, 13), and 1 study retrieved postdiagnostic BMI from urologists at the time of entering the CaPSURE database (41). The 2 population-based studies controlled for smoking status, but none of the 4 clinical studies did so. All the studies controlled for clinical risk, mostly through Gleason score.

The 16 studies on BMI and biochemical recurrence (12–16, 26, 33, 36, 37, 42–48) followed 26,479 prostate cancer patients after primary treatment for 2 to 10 years (Table 2). Majority of the studies were conducted in the United States, 2 in the Netherlands, 1 in Japan, and mostly in a single clinic or medical center. In most studies, BMI was measured or self-reported at study enrollment, either at diagnosis or immediately before surgery, whereas some did not indicate the timing for BMI measurement. Most studies controlled for preoperative clinical and/or pathologic characteristics (i.e., preoperative prostate-specific antigen (PSA) level, Gleason score, and surgical margin status), but none of the studies controlled for smoking status.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Characteristics of identified studies on BMI and biochemical recurrence after prostate cancer treatment (N = 16)

Main findings

The pooled estimates for the 6 cohort studies showed a significant 15% (RR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.06–1.25, P < 0.01) higher risk of prostate cancer mortality associated with each 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI (Fig. 2A). The P value for heterogeneity from the Cochran Q test (Q = 12.23) was 0.03 and I2 was 59%, suggesting a moderate heterogeneity between studies.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

A, RRs per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI and prostate cancer–specific mortality. B, RRs per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI and biochemical recurrence after treatment. RP, radical prostatectomy; RT, radiation therapy, including brachytherapy, external beam radiation therapy, and radiation therapy with androgen suppression therapy.

Pooling the 6 postdiagnosis survival studies showed a 20% higher risk of prostate cancer–specific mortality (RR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.99–1.46, P = 0.06) associated with each 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI (Fig. 2A). The P value for heterogeneity from Cochran Q test (Q = 19.18) was less than 0.01 and I2 was 74%, indicating high heterogeneity among studies. The high heterogeneity explains the borderline nonsignificance of the overall estimation and was mainly driven by nonsignificant inverse association reported from the CaPSURE study (41), which counted for more than a third of the pooled population.

A 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI was associated with a 21% increased risk of biochemical recurrence (RR: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.11–1.31, P < 0.01; Fig. 2B). The P value for heterogeneity was less than 0.01 (Q = 63.15) and I2 was 75%, suggesting a high degree of heterogeneity among studies. We also evaluated the association by types of treatment because severe obesity might prohibit patients from receiving surgical treatment and thus bias the overall estimate. Among the 11 (12 data points) studies of radical prostatectomy (RP), 10 (11 data points) showed positive associations and 9 were statistically significant. The pooled estimate showed that a 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI was associated with a significant 25% higher risk of biochemical recurrence (RR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.12–1.40, P < 0.01; Q = 54.63, I2 = 79%). Among patients treated with radiation therapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy (ADT), 4 of the 5 studies showed positive associations and 3 were statistically significant. The pooled estimate showed that a 5 kg/m2 increase BMI was associated with a significant 15% higher risk of biochemical recurrence (RR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.03–1.28, P = 0.01; Q = 7.09, I2 = 44%).

Sensitivity analysis

We conducted sensitivity analysis by omitting one study at a time, generating the pooled estimates and comparing with the original estimates. Omitting any 1 of 6 population-based cohort studies had no dramatic influence on the original pooled RRs, with newly pooled RR ranging from 1.11 (95% CI: 1.04–1.18) to 1.20 (95% CI: 1.05–1.35). In the 6 postdiagnosis survival studies, omitting the study of Davies and colleagues generated a significant RR of 1.30 (95% CI: 1.15–1.47) whereas none of the other had a huge influence on the original estimates, with RRs ranging from 1.17 (95% CI: 0.95–1.39) to 1.26 (95% CI: 0.99–1.54). Of the 16 studies on BMI and biochemical recurrence, none of the studies altered significance of the original estimate with newly pooled RRs from 1.24 (95% CI: 1.14–1.34) to 1.30 (95% CI: 1.19–1.41).

Subsequent sensitivity analysis by stratification suggested greater RR in studies conducted in the United States than in Europe, self-reported BMI compared with measured BMI in population-based cohort study, postdiagnosis survival study, and study of biochemical recurrence among patients treated with RP (Table 3). RR was slighter lower and nonsignificant (RR: 1.24; 95% CI: 0.98–1.58) in studies (12, 37, 42, 43, 48) that used definition of biochemical recurrence other than single PSA level of 0.2 ng/mL or more (15, 26, 36, 47) or single PSA level of more than 0.2 ng/mL, 2 values of 0.2 ng/mL, or secondary treatment of a high PSA level after RP (16, 33). Among patients treated with radiation therapy, no association between BMI and biochemical recurrence was detected in patients receiving brachytherapy (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.78–1.25; refs. 13, 46).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Stratified meta-analysis of the association of BMI and prostate cancer-specific mortality and biochemical recurrence

Publication bias

Publication bias was not observed among the 6 population-based cohort studies and the 6 postdiagnosis survival studies on BMI and prostate cancer–specific mortality. Significant publication bias as indicated by an asymmetric funnel plot among the 16 studies on BMI and biochemical recurrence revealed the possibility of selective publication of positive findings.

Population attributable risk percent in diagnosed patients

In total, 20% of the prostate cancer deaths were attributable to overweight (10.9%) and obesity (9.1%), without the study by Davies and colleagues. With this study, the PAR% was 11.7% in total, 6.1% from overweight and 5.6% from obesity.

Discussion

We found that higher BMI in initially cancer-free population was significantly associated with higher risk of future prostate cancer mortality. Among diagnosed patients, higher BMI was associated with a significantly higher risk of biochemical recurrence after primary treatment and a borderline nonsignificantly elevated risk of prostate cancer–specific mortality. To our knowledge, this is the first meta-analysis that comprehensively summarized and quantitatively analyzed the current findings on obesity and outcomes of prostate cancer.

Previously, 2 meta-analyses on BMI and risk of prostate cancer were published but each addressed different hypothesis compared with our study. Robinson and colleagues summarized findings on the association of childhood and young adulthood BMI and risk of developing advanced prostate cancer and fatal prostate cancer (only 1 study on fatal outcome), and the RR was close to the null (RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.89–1.14) for each 5-unit increase in BMI (49), indicating little impact of young adulthood BMI on risk of advanced prostate cancer. MacInnis and colleagues meta-analyzed both cohort and case–control studies on BMI and risk of developing advanced prostate cancer and found that BMI was associated with 12% higher risk of advanced prostate cancer (RR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.01–1.23) for each 5-unit increase in BMI (2). However, the association of BMI and fatal prostate cancer was not addressed in that study. In the present study, we assessed end points of disease progression such as prostate cancer mortality and biochemical recurrence among healthy population and among the diagnosed patients to specifically evaluate the role of adiposity on prostate cancer progression.

Overall, we found that the magnitude of the pooled effect estimates were quite similar to 15% to 21% increased risk for each 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI, despite different study designs (cohort or survival studies), study settings (cohort from healthy group or clinical studies), outcome assessments (prostate cancer–specific mortality or recurrence), or from multiple countries with different social economic or racial (Caucasians, African Americans, and Asian men) backgrounds. The similar pooled estimates across different types of clinical treatments further suggest the robust association between obesity and prostate cancer progression.

Several possible explanations have been proposed. First, such association could be due to delayed diagnosis and more advanced stage at diagnosis in obese men. It has been suggested that obesity makes early detection of prostate cancer more difficult due to less PSA screening, lower accuracy of digital rectal examination in obese men, and lower PSA values caused by obesity-related hemodilution (33, 50). Obese individual has higher chance to be missed, as the cancer detected by PSA screening is so small and larger prostate gland (51) makes the detection of existent cancer less likely (52). Although the existence of such detection bias could not be fully ruled out, studies by Wright and colleagues and Ma and colleagues suggested that elevated BMI was significantly associated with higher risk of prostate cancer–specific mortality in those without PSA screening (4) and in both pre- and PSA screening era (11). Alternatively, difficulties in treatment, such as increased risk of positive surgical margins (12, 23, 31), and the greater day-to-day variation in prostate location that leads to lower dose and less effective radiation (53) could also contribute to the poorer outcome observed in diagnosed patients. However, the association with recurrence is still strong and significant after adjusting for margin status in many of the studies included in our analysis (Table 2).

Potential biological mechanisms of adiposity and prostate cancer progression have been proposed and are under investigation. Hormonal and metabolic changes in obese men are the primary concern. One hypothesis is that certain obesity-related metabolic dysregulation such as hyperinsulinemia and/or hypoadiponectinemia favors aggressive neoplastic behavior (11, 54). It was also found that lower levels of testosterone in obese men might be linked to poorly differentiated and hormone-insensitive tumors (55, 56). Obesity is also associated with increased levels of free insulin-like growth factor-I, which is found to stimulate growth of prostate cell lines in vitro and be more closely related to advanced stage prostate cancer in human (57).

High heterogeneity was detected among the studies reviewed in the present analysis. The stratified meta-analyses suggested strong and consistent association between BMI and higher prostate cancer mortality and biochemical recurrence in studies conducted in the United States. Smaller RRs in the few available studies from Europe could be attributable to large variability in the linear transformed RRs under a lower prevalence of obesity in European countries. We also found that studies using self-reported BMI presented stronger association than studies utilizing measured BMI, and different magnitudes of association between BMI and biochemical recurrence among patients on different radiation therapies were also observed. These evidences reflected the need for investigations in different countries and among different subgroup of patients.

In further reviewing the heterogeneity between cohort studies and clinical studies, several issues are worth noting. First, missing data of BMI and shorter period of follow-up in clinical studies could bias the estimate and limit the findings. For example, in the study by Siddiqui and colleagues, 23% of the patients had missing BMI, and in Davies and colleagues, only 53% of the patients in the CaPSURE database were included. Both studies and the study by van Roermund and colleagues reported lower prostate cancer–specific mortality (3%–4%) than other studies either due to short follow-up of 3 to 4 years or selection of much healthier individuals. Second, clinical studies have detailed treatment information but many of these studies lack data for major confounding factors such as cigarette smoking. The J-shape association of BMI with total mortality confounded by cigarette smoking (58, 59) may apply similarly to BMI and prostate cancer mortality, as current smokers may have increased risk of dying of prostate cancer (60, 61). However, none of the clinical studies included in our analysis controlled for smoking. In contrast, although large prospective cohort studies tend to have a more valid measurement of exposure and covariates, as well as complete follow-up, these studies usually lack detailed clinical treatment information. Therefore, the totality of the evidence obtained from different population, study settings, and outcome assessments in our meta-analysis provides a more objective conclusion.

Over the past 2 decades, widespread PSA screening significantly increased the number of prostate cancers detected at very early stage whereas cancer-specific mortality remains relatively constant over time (62). Many men with localized tumors, especially obese or overweight men, are likely to have diabetes and cardiovascular disease and are more likely to die of diseases other than prostate cancer. Because the majority of the studies reviewed in this meta-analysis did not control for competing causes of death, the pooled RR could be an attenuated estimate.

Timing of the BMI assessment is important to evaluate the possibility of reverse causation, that is, weight change influenced by disease severity or treatments (e.g., ADT causes weight gain even after a short period of treatment; ref. 63), and is crucial to the design of intervention. In our study, all of the 6 cohort studies and study by Ma and colleagues assessed BMI years in midlife and found stronger association, suggesting that adiposity precede cancer progression. Although whether weight control will help improve outcomes among overweight and obese patient remains uncertain, our findings from BMI measured at diagnosis or before surgery suggest additional clinical benefit to improve outcome from prostate cancer. In a recent study among patients underwent prostatectomy, Joshu and colleagues found that, those whose weight increased >2.2 kg from 5 years before to 1 year after surgery had twice the recurrence risk (HR = 1.94, 95% CI 1.14–3.32) compared with those who had stable weights (64), further supported the detrimental effect of adiposity and prostate cancer progression. Together, these data provide encouraging evidence for using weight management to prevent disease progression and prostate cancer-specific mortality. Interventions may include increasing self-awareness, more early detection efforts by health care professionals, more counseling on healthy lifestyle (i.e., exercise) after diagnosis, and appropriate individualized treatment of overweight or obese patients.

The strengths of our study include the use of generalized least-squares methods for RR transformations associated with a standard per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI to allow for comparisons among different studies using different BMI categories, the use of the random-effect model to incorporate heterogeneity, separated analysis on BMI and fatal prostate cancer by different study design and different outcomes, sensitivity analysis, and estimation of population attributable risk.

Meta-analysis of observational studies cannot avoid undetected biases and confounding factors inherent in the original studies. Analyzing BMI as a continuous variable by first transforming all the RR estimates to the corresponding RRs for every 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI was a way to allow for comparisons among studies, but it also assumed the risk increment was constant. We validated such methods in studies that presented RRs for both continuous and categorical BMI and found that the RR per kg/m2 increase obtained by conversion was similar to the RR for continuous BMI shown in the article (11).

We did not include 4 studies (27–30) on biochemical recurrence that did not present RR estimates or CIs. Among these 4 studies, 2 studies in Canada showed that elevated BMI was predictive of reduced biochemical disease-free survival among patients treated with radiation therapy (27) or RP (30). Another 2 consecutive studies by Merrick and colleague showed null association between BMI and biochemical recurrence-free survival in patients treated with brachytherapy, which were consistent with studies included in our meta-analysis (Table 3). We also excluded 2 studies that presented only univariate RR estimates because the association of BMI and prostate cancer outcome is potentially confounded by confounding factors such as age. Among these 2 studies, Motamedinia and colleagues found no difference in the actual observed biochemical failure rate of obese and nonobese patients, whereas Amling and colleagues showed that obesity alone predicted biochemical recurrence with RR of 1.20 (95% CI: 1.02–1.42) for obese versus nonobese patients. The association was not significant in the multivariate model after adjusting for pathologic variables, but the study unfortunately did not present the data. They also found that increased BMI was associated with worse pathologic outcomes, that is, BMI was an independent predictor of higher Gleason cancer grade, thus suggested that the association between obesity and poor biochemical recurrence could be mediated by pathologic factors. If true, our pooled RR would be a conservative estimate of the association between BMI and biochemical recurrence, as majority of the studies included in our meta-analysis had adjusted for pathologic variables.

In conclusion, this meta-analysis provides the first quantitative assessment of the evidence accumulated up to date from 26 studies of a pooled population of 1,302,246 from different countries and various study designs, and majority were published within the past 5 years. It showed a consistent 15% to 21% increased risk of fatal prostate cancer or biochemical recurrence and an estimated 12% to 20% of prostate cancer deaths could be attributable to overweight and obesity. Further investigations are needed to evaluate the role of BMI measured at different stages of life, before, at, or after prostate cancer diagnosis, and the impact of weight control on prostate cancer–specific and all-cause mortality. Studies of biomarkers and genetic markers related to adiposity and energy metabolism will provide biological plausibility for a causal role and can guide the development of effective and targeted cancer prevention and therapeutic strategies. Randomized weight control interventions in clinical setting or community-based program could provide a more definitive answer.

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest

No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed.

Acknowledgments

We thank Dr. Yi Ning for programming support for the analyses in this article, and Daad Abraham for technical support in preparation of the meta-analysis.

  • Received September 7, 2010.
  • Revision received November 22, 2010.
  • Accepted January 3, 2011.
  • ©2011 American Association for Cancer Research.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Calle EE,
    2. Rodriguez C,
    3. Walker-Thurmond K,
    4. Thun MJ
    . Overweight, obesity, and mortality from cancer in a prospectively studied cohort of U.S. adults. N Engl J Med 2003; 348: 1625–38.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. MacInnis RJ,
    2. English DR
    . Body size and composition and prostate cancer risk: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Cancer Causes Control 2006; 17: 989–1003.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Rodriguez C,
    2. Freedland SJ,
    3. Deka A,
    4. Jacobs EJ,
    5. McCullough ML,
    6. Patel AV,
    7. et al.
    Body mass index, weight change, and risk of prostate cancer in the Cancer Prevention Study II Nutrition Cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007; 16: 63–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. 4.↵
    1. Wright ME,
    2. Chang SC,
    3. Schatzkin A,
    4. Albanes D,
    5. Kipnis V,
    6. Mouw T,
    7. et al.
    Prospective study of adiposity and weight change in relation to prostate cancer incidence and mortality. Cancer 2007; 109: 675–84.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Gong Z,
    2. Neuhouser ML,
    3. Goodman PJ,
    4. Albanes D,
    5. Chi C,
    6. Hsing AW,
    7. et al.
    Obesity, diabetes, and risk of prostate cancer: results from the prostate cancer prevention trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15: 1977–83.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Andersson SO,
    2. Wolk A,
    3. Bergstrom R,
    4. Adami HO,
    5. Engholm G,
    6. Englund A,
    7. et al.
    Body size and prostate cancer: a 20-year follow-up study among 135006 Swedish construction workers. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997; 89: 385–9.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Giovannucci E,
    2. Liu Y,
    3. Platz EA,
    4. Stampfer MJ,
    5. Willett WC
    . Risk factors for prostate cancer incidence and progression in the health professionals follow-up study. Int J Cancer 2007; 121: 1571–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Rodriguez C,
    2. Patel AV,
    3. Calle EE,
    4. Jacobs EJ,
    5. Chao A,
    6. Thun MJ
    . Body mass index, height, and prostate cancer mortality in two large cohorts of adult men in the United States. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001; 10: 345–53.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. 9.↵
    1. Efstathiou JA,
    2. Bae K,
    3. Shipley WU,
    4. Hanks GE,
    5. Pilepich MV,
    6. Sandler HM,
    7. et al.
    Obesity and mortality in men with locally advanced prostate cancer: analysis of RTOG 85-31. Cancer 2007; 110: 2691–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Gong Z,
    2. Agalliu I,
    3. Lin DW,
    4. Stanford JL,
    5. Kristal AR
    . Obesity is associated with increased risks of prostate cancer metastasis and death after initial cancer diagnosis in middle-aged men. Cancer 2007; 109: 1192–202.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Ma J,
    2. Li H,
    3. Giovannucci E,
    4. Mucci L,
    5. Qiu W,
    6. Nguyen PL,
    7. et al.
    Prediagnostic body-mass index, plasma C-peptide concentration, and prostate cancer-specific mortality in men with prostate cancer: a long-term survival analysis. Lancet Oncol 2008; 9: 1039–47.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Siddiqui SA,
    2. Inman BA,
    3. Sengupta S,
    4. Slezak JM,
    5. Bergstralh EJ,
    6. Leibovich BC,
    7. et al.
    Obesity and survival after radical prostatectomy: a 10-year prospective cohort study. Cancer 2006; 107: 521–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. van Roermund JG,
    2. Hinnen KA,
    3. Battermann JJ,
    4. Witjes JA,
    5. Bosch JL,
    6. Kiemeney LA,
    7. et al.
    Body mass index is not a prognostic marker for prostate-specific antigen failure and survival in Dutch men treated with brachytherapy. BJU Int 2010; 105: 42–8.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Efstathiou JA,
    2. Chen MH,
    3. Renshaw AA,
    4. Loffredo MJ,
    5. D'Amico AV
    . Influence of body mass index on prostate-specific antigen failure after androgen suppression and radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer. Cancer 2007; 109: 1493–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Hisasue S,
    2. Yanase M,
    3. Shindo T,
    4. Iwaki H,
    5. Fukuta F,
    6. Nishida S,
    7. et al.
    Influence of body mass index and total testosterone level on biochemical recurrence following radical prostatectomy. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2008; 38: 129–33.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Jayachandran J,
    2. Banez LL,
    3. Aronson WJ,
    4. Terris MK,
    5. Presti JC Jr.,
    6. Amling CL,
    7. et al.
    Obesity as a predictor of adverse outcome across black and white race: results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) Database. Cancer 2009; 115: 5263–71.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Stroup DF,
    2. Berlin JA,
    3. Morton SC,
    4. Olkin I,
    5. Williamson GD,
    6. Rennie D,
    7. et al.
    Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA 2000; 283: 2008–12.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Halabi S,
    2. Ou SS,
    3. Vogelzang NJ,
    4. Small EJ
    . Inverse correlation between body mass index and clinical outcomes in men with advanced castration-recurrent prostate cancer. Cancer 2007; 110: 1478–84.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Halabi S,
    2. Small EJ,
    3. Vogelzang NJ
    . Elevated body mass index predicts for longer overall survival duration in men with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 2434–5 author reply 5.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Mallah KN,
    2. DiBlasio CJ,
    3. Rhee AC,
    4. Scardino PT,
    5. Kattan MW
    . Body mass index is weakly associated with, and not a helpful predictor of, disease progression in men with clinically localized prostate carcinoma treated with radical prostatectomy. Cancer 2005; 103: 2030–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Smith MR,
    2. Bae K,
    3. Efstathiou JA,
    4. Hanks GE,
    5. Pilepich MV,
    6. Sandler HM,
    7. et al.
    Diabetes and mortality in men with locally advanced prostate cancer: RTOG 92-02. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26: 4333–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Snowdon DA,
    2. Phillips RL,
    3. Choi W
    . Diet, obesity, and risk of fatal prostate cancer. Am J Epidemiol 1984; 120: 244–50.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Freedland SJ,
    2. Aronson WJ,
    3. Kane CJ,
    4. Presti JC,
    5. Jr,
    6. Amling CL,
    7. Elashoff D,
    8. et al.
    Impact of obesity on biochemical control after radical prostatectomy for clinically localized prostate cancer: a report by the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital database study group. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 446–53.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Freedland SJ,
    2. Terris MK,
    3. Presti JC Jr,
    4. Amling CL,
    5. Kane CJ,
    6. Trock B,
    7. et al.
    Obesity and biochemical outcome following radical prostatectomy for organ confined disease with negative surgical margins. J Urol 2004; 172: 520–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Freedland SJ,
    2. Grubb KA,
    3. Yiu SK,
    4. Humphreys EB,
    5. Nielsen ME,
    6. Mangold LA,
    7. et al.
    Obesity and risk of biochemical progression following radical prostatectomy at a tertiary care referral center. J Urol 2005; 174: 919–22.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Magheli A,
    2. Rais-Bahrami S,
    3. Trock BJ,
    4. Humphreys EB,
    5. Partin AW,
    6. Han M,
    7. et al.
    Impact of body mass index on biochemical recurrence rates after radical prostatectomy: an analysis utilizing propensity score matching. Urology 2008; 72: 1246–51.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Palma D,
    2. Pickles T,
    3. Tyldesley S
    . Obesity as a predictor of biochemical recurrence and survival after radiation therapy for prostate cancer. BJU Int 2007; 100: 315–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Merrick GS,
    2. Galbreath RW,
    3. Butler WM,
    4. Wallner KE,
    5. Allen ZA,
    6. Adamovich E
    . Obesity is not predictive of overall survival following permanent prostate brachytherapy. Am J Clin Oncol 2007; 30: 588–96.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Merrick GS,
    2. Butler WM,
    3. Wallner KE,
    4. Galbreath RW,
    5. Allen Z,
    6. Lief JH,
    7. et al.
    Influence of body mass index on biochemical outcome after permanent prostate brachytherapy. Urology 2005; 65: 95–100.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  30. 30.↵
    1. Chun FK,
    2. Briganti A,
    3. Graefen M,
    4. Erbersdobler A,
    5. Walz J,
    6. Schlomm T,
    7. et al.
    Body mass index does not improve the ability to predict biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy. Eur J Cancer 2007; 43: 375–82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Amling CL,
    2. Riffenburgh RH,
    3. Sun L,
    4. Moul JW,
    5. Lance RS,
    6. Kusuda L,
    7. et al.
    Pathologic variables and recurrence rates as related to obesity and race in men with prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22: 439–45.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  32. 32.↵
    1. Motamedinia P,
    2. Korets R,
    3. Spencer BA,
    4. Benson MC,
    5. McKiernan JM
    . Body mass index trends and role of obesity in predicting outcome after radical prostatectomy. Urology 2008; 72: 1106–10.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  33. 33.↵
    1. Freedland SJ,
    2. Sun L,
    3. Kane CJ,
    4. Presti JC Jr.,
    5. Terris MK,
    6. Amling CL,
    7. et al.
    Obesity and oncological outcome after radical prostatectomy: impact of prostate-specific antigen-based prostate cancer screening: results from the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital and Duke Prostate Center databases. BJU Int 2008; 102: 969–74.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Orisini N BR,
    2. Greenland S
    . Generalized least squares for trend estimation of summarized dose-response data. Stata J 2006; 6: 40–57.
    OpenUrl
  35. 35.↵
    1. Ning Y,
    2. Wang L,
    3. Giovannucci EL
    . A quantitative analysis of body mass index and colorectal cancer: findings from 56 observational studies. Obes Rev 2010; 11: 19–30.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. Freedland SJ,
    2. Isaacs WB,
    3. Mangold LA,
    4. Yiu SK,
    5. Grubb KA,
    6. Partin AW,
    7. et al.
    Stronger association between obesity and biochemical progression after radical prostatectomy among men treated in the last 10 years. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11: 2883–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    1. Spangler E,
    2. Zeigler-Johnson CM,
    3. Coomes M,
    4. Malkowicz SB,
    5. Wein A,
    6. Rebbeck TR
    . Association of obesity with tumor characteristics and treatment failure of prostate cancer in African-American and European American men. J Urol 2007; 178: 1939–44 discussion 45.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. 38.↵
    1. DerSimonian R,
    2. Laird N
    . Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 1986; 7: 177–88.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Flegal KM,
    2. Carroll MD,
    3. Ogden CL,
    4. Curtin LR
    . Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2008. JAMA 2010; 303: 235–41.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. Eichholzer M,
    2. Bernasconi F,
    3. Jordan P,
    4. Stahelin HB
    . Body mass index and the risk of male cancer mortality of various sites: 17-year follow-up of the Basel cohort study. Swiss Med Wkly 2005; 135: 27–33.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    1. Davies BJ,
    2. Smaldone MC,
    3. Sadetsky N,
    4. Dall'era M,
    5. Carroll PR
    . The impact of obesity on overall and cancer specific survival in men with prostate cancer. J Urol 2009; 182: 112–7 discussion 7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    1. Bassett WW,
    2. Cooperberg MR,
    3. Sadetsky N,
    4. Silva S,
    5. DuChane J,
    6. Pasta DJ,
    7. et al.
    Impact of obesity on prostate cancer recurrence after radical prostatectomy: data from CaPSURE. Urology 2005; 66: 1060–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. Strom SS,
    2. Wang X,
    3. Pettaway CA,
    4. Logothetis CJ,
    5. Yamamura Y,
    6. Do KA,
    7. et al.
    Obesity, weight gain, and risk of biochemical failure among prostate cancer patients following prostatectomy. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11: 6889–94.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    1. Strom SS,
    2. Kamat AM,
    3. Gruschkus SK,
    4. Gu Y,
    5. Wen S,
    6. Cheung MR,
    7. et al.
    Influence of obesity on biochemical and clinical failure after external-beam radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Cancer 2006; 107: 631–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. 45.↵
    1. Stroup SP,
    2. Cullen J,
    3. Auge BK,
    4. L'Esperance JO,
    5. Kang SK
    . Effect of obesity on prostate-specific antigen recurrence after radiation therapy for localized prostate cancer as measured by the 2006 Radiation Therapy Oncology Group-American Society for Therapeutic Radiation and Oncology (RTOG-ASTRO) Phoenix consensus definition. Cancer 2007; 110: 1003–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    1. Efstathiou JA,
    2. Skowronski RY,
    3. Coen JJ,
    4. Grocela JA,
    5. Hirsch AE,
    6. Zietman AL
    . Body mass index and prostate-specific antigen failure following brachytherapy for localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 71: 1302–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. 47.↵
    1. King CR,
    2. Spiotto MT,
    3. Kapp DS
    . Obesity and risk of biochemical failure for patients receiving salvage radiotherapy after prostatectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2009; 73: 1017–22.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    1. van Roermund JG,
    2. Kok DE,
    3. Wildhagen MF,
    4. Kiemeney LA,
    5. Struik F,
    6. Sloot S,
    7. et al.
    Body mass index as a prognostic marker for biochemical recurrence in Dutch men treated with radical prostatectomy. BJU Int 2009; 104: 321–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. 49.↵
    1. Robinson WR,
    2. Poole C,
    3. Godley PA
    . Systematic review of prostate cancer's association with body size in childhood and young adulthood. Cancer Causes Control 2008; 19: 793–803.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  50. 50.↵
    1. Banez LL,
    2. Hamilton RJ,
    3. Partin AW,
    4. Vollmer RT,
    5. Sun L,
    6. Rodriguez C,
    7. et al.
    Obesity-related plasma hemodilution and PSA concentration among men with prostate cancer. JAMA 2007; 298: 2275–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. 51.↵
    1. Freedland SJ,
    2. Platz EA,
    3. Presti JC,
    4. Jr,
    5. Aronson WJ,
    6. Amling CL,
    7. Kane CJ,
    8. et al.
    Obesity, serum prostate specific antigen and prostate size: implications for prostate cancer detection. J Urol 2006; 175: 500–4 discussion 4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  52. 52.↵
    1. Kranse R,
    2. Beemsterboer P,
    3. Rietbergen J,
    4. Habbema D,
    5. Hugosson J,
    6. Schroder FH
    . Predictors for biopsy outcome in the European Randomized Study of Screening for Prostate Cancer (Rotterdam region). Prostate 1999; 39: 316–22.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. 53.↵
    1. Millender LE,
    2. Aubin M,
    3. Pouliot J,
    4. Shinohara K,
    5. Roach M III.
    . Daily electronic portal imaging for morbidly obese men undergoing radiotherapy for localized prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2004; 59: 6–10.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.↵
    1. Li H,
    2. Stampfer MJ,
    3. Mucci L,
    4. Rifai N,
    5. Qiu W,
    6. Kurth T,
    7. et al.
    A 25-year prospective study of plasma adiponectin and leptin concentrations and prostate cancer risk and survival. Clin Chem 2010; 56: 34–43.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  55. 55.↵
    1. Platz EA,
    2. Leitzmann MF,
    3. Rifai N,
    4. Kantoff PW,
    5. Chen YC,
    6. Stampfer MJ,
    7. et al.
    Sex steroid hormones and the androgen receptor gene CAG repeat and subsequent risk of prostate cancer in the prostate-specific antigen era. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14: 1262–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  56. 56.↵
    1. Severi G,
    2. Morris HA,
    3. MacInnis RJ,
    4. English DR,
    5. Tilley W,
    6. Hopper JL,
    7. et al.
    Circulating steroid hormones and the risk of prostate cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15: 86–91.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  57. 57.↵
    1. Chan JM,
    2. Stampfer MJ,
    3. Ma J,
    4. Gann P,
    5. Gaziano JM,
    6. Pollak M,
    7. et al.
    Insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) and IGF binding protein-3 as predictors of advanced-stage prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94: 1099–106.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  58. 58.↵
    1. Lee IM,
    2. Manson JE,
    3. Hennekens CH,
    4. Paffenbarger RS Jr.
    . Body weight and mortality. A 27-year follow-up of middle-aged men. JAMA 1993; 270: 2823–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  59. 59.↵
    1. Manson JE,
    2. Willett WC,
    3. Stampfer MJ,
    4. Colditz GA,
    5. Hunter DJ,
    6. Hankinson SE,
    7. et al.
    Body weight and mortality among women. N Engl J Med 1995; 333: 677–85.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  60. 60.↵
    1. Huncharek M,
    2. Haddock S,
    3. Reid R,
    4. Kupelnick B
    . Smoking as a risk factor for prostate cancer: a meta-analysis of 24 prospective cohort studies. Am J Public Health 2010; 100: 693–701.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  61. 61.↵
    1. Zu K,
    2. Giovannucci E
    . Smoking and aggressive prostate cancer: a review of the epidemiologic evidence. Cancer Causes Control 2009Jun 27 [Epub ahead of print].
  62. 62.↵
    1. Jemal A,
    2. Siegel R,
    3. Ward E,
    4. Hao Y,
    5. Xu J,
    6. Thun MJ
    . Cancer statistics, 2009. CA Cancer J Clin 2009; 59: 225–49.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  63. 63.↵
    1. Higano CS
    . Side effects of androgen deprivation therapy: monitoring and minimizing toxicity. Urology 2003; 61: 32–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  64. 64.
    1. Joshu CE,
    2. Mondul AM,
    3. Menke A,
    4. Meinhold CL,
    5. Han M,
    6. Humphreys E,
    7. et al.
    Weight gain is associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer recurrence after prostatectomy in the PSA era.. Cancer Prev Res 2011; 4: 544–51.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Cancer Prevention Research: 4 (4)
April 2011
Volume 4, Issue 4
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Cancer Prevention Research article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Body Mass Index, Prostate Cancer–Specific Mortality, and Biochemical Recurrence: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Prevention Research
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Prevention Research.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Body Mass Index, Prostate Cancer–Specific Mortality, and Biochemical Recurrence: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Yin Cao and Jing Ma
Cancer Prev Res April 1 2011 (4) (4) 486-501; DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-10-0229

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Body Mass Index, Prostate Cancer–Specific Mortality, and Biochemical Recurrence: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Yin Cao and Jing Ma
Cancer Prev Res April 1 2011 (4) (4) 486-501; DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-10-0229
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Material and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Diet and DNA damage repair in cancer
  • Cancer in normal-weight individuals with metabolic obesity
  • Epigenetics and Cancer Prevention by Isothiocyanates
Show more Reviews
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   YouTube   RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Cancer Prevention Research

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Cancer Prevention Research
eISSN: 1940-6215
ISSN: 1940-6207

Advertisement