Key result
Lack of moderate physical activity linked to ~6% higher lung cancer risk versus 1-2 days weekly.
Why the study?
The study investigated the effect of moderate and vigorous physical activity on lung cancer risk, including potential effect modification by sex and smoking.
Does moderate or vigorous physical activity reduce the risk of lung cancer in a general screening population?
Cohort (n=4,505,103)
Does moderate or vigorous physical activity reduce the risk of lung cancer in a general screening population?
Lack of moderate or vigorous physical activity is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer, particularly in males and smokers.
No immediate change to activity counseling indicated; leaves open a modest observational association needing prospective confirmation.
Objectives: We investigated the effect of moderate and vigorous physical activity (PA) on lung cancer risk, with effect modification by sex and smoking.Methods: This study included participants from the National Health Examination and gastric cancer screening program (2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017).Moderate-or vigorous-intensity PA was classified into four groups: Category 1 (0 days/week), 2 (1-2 days/week), 3 (3-5 days/ week), and 4 (6-7 days/week).Lung cancer risk was evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models, reporting adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).Findings: Among 4,505,103 individuals, 33,432 lung cancers were newly identified during follow-up.In adjusted analysis for moderate-intensity PA, Category 1 (aHR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.10)and Category 3 (aHR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.00-1.09)were associated with an increased risk of lung cancer compared to Category 2. After excluding cancers within two years (sensitivity analysis), only Category 1 (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05-1.12)was linked to increased lung cancer risk.Sex and smoking modified these effects: Category 1 raised lung cancer risk in male (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.05-1.13)but not in females.PA frequency had no association with lung cancer risk in never smokers and Category 1 was associated with increased lung cancer risk in past smokers (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.02-1.17),whereas both Category 1 (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.04-1.15)and Category 3 (aHR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.06-1.21)were associated with elevated risks of lung cancer in current smokers.Vigorous-intensity PA also had a sex-specific effect on lung cancer risk.Conclusions: Lack of moderate-or vigorous-intensity PA was associated with increased lung cancer risks, particularly in males and smokers.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nam et al. (2026) conducted a cohort in Lung cancer (n=4,505,103). Lack of moderate-intensity physical activity vs. 1-2 days/week of moderate-intensity physical activity was evaluated on Lung cancer incidence (aHR 1.06, 95% CI 1.03-1.10, p=<0.0001). Lack of moderate-intensity physical activity was associated with an increased risk of lung cancer (aHR 1.06) compared to 1-2 days per week of activity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: