Retrospective cohort study finds elevated cervical cancer risk in women with metabolic syndrome, suggesting critical health implications.
Objective To determine whether metabolic syndrome is associated with an elevated risk of cervical cancer. Methods We retrospectively analyzed data on 1,410,650 women without a history of cancer, using the JMDC Claims Database, a nationwide epidemiological database in Japan, between 2005 and 2022. The look‐back period was set at 2 years. Cox regression analyses were conducted to assess cervical cancer risk associated with metabolic syndrome and its components (waist circumference, blood pressure, triglycerides, high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol, and fasting plasma glucose). Further, we conducted age‐stratified analyses. Results Metabolic syndrome was diagnosed in 43,029 participants (median age: 53 years), and 1579 cervical cancer cases were recorded over a median follow‐up of 942 days. Multivariable Cox regression analyses showed that metabolic syndrome was associated with a higher cervical cancer incidence (hazard ratio [HR], 1.38; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04–1.82). Among the metabolic factors, cancer risk was associated with higher plasma glucose (per 10 mg/dL increase) (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01–1.08) and lower high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (per 10 mg/dL decrease) (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02–1.10), whereas waist circumference, blood pressure, or triglyceride levels showed no significant relationship. Metabolic syndrome was associated with an increased risk of cervical cancer, with a stronger association observed in younger women in age‐stratified analyses ( p for interaction = 0.004). Conclusion Metabolic syndrome was associated with an increased risk of cervical cancer, with a stronger association observed among younger women. Elevated plasma glucose and low high‐density lipoprotein cholesterol levels were identified as significant contributing factors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jiang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: