Retrospective cohort study evaluates cancer outcomes in patients with metabolic syndrome, indicating significant risks.
Objective. To assess the likelihood of developing malignant neoplasms, the features of their course and the five-year outcome, depending on the dynamics of anthropometric and biochemical parameters in patients with metabolic syndrome (MS). Material and methods. In a retrospective cohort study, data from 1993 patients were analyzed, of which 994 patients with MS formed the main group, 999 patients without MS — the comparison group. MS was determined by the presence of abdominal obesity (AO) in combination with two or more additional signs (dyslipidemia, hyperglycemia, arterial hypertension). The course and outcome of the disease in cancer patients with MS were considered depending on the dynamics of MS indicators one year and five years after the diagnosis was confirmed. Statistical analysis was performed using the SPSS INC 27.0 program. Results. In patients with MS, cases of malignant neoplasms were noted in 18.6% of patients, while in the absence of MS — only 7.3%. In an intergroup comparison, these differences reached the criteria of statistical significance (p<0.05). Normalization of biochemical parameters such as HDL, TG, and glucose levels one year and five years after cancer diagnosis reduces the risk of metastasis and recurrence and reduces the risk of death (p<0.05). On the contrary, an increase in the deviation from the norm leads to a progression of the process and increases the frequency of deaths. Conclusion. MS and its components are risk factors for cancer of any localization. With the normalization of previously identified changes that meet additional criteria for MS, a year after the identified oncopathology, the risk of metastasis and recurrence of the process decreases, and after five years, the risk of mortality from cancer decreases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mitrokhina et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: