Key result
Social isolation in women is not linked to cancer mortality despite higher fibrinogen levels.
Why the study?
This study evaluates the role of social isolation on inflammation and cancer mortality among women.
Does social isolation increase inflammation and cancer mortality in women?
Cross-Sectional (n=3,360)
Yes
Does social isolation increase inflammation and cancer mortality in women?
Social isolation in women is associated with increased systemic inflammation (fibrinogen) but does not independently predict cancer mortality.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Social isolation should not yet inform cancer mortality risk assessment in women; leaves open inflammation's role in other outcomes.
BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the role of social isolation on inflammation and cancer mortality among women. METHODS: Data were abstracted from the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey from 1988 to 1994. The Social Network Index was used to assess participants' degree of social isolation. C-reactive protein and fibrinogen levels were included as markers of inflammation. We used the National Death Index to identify causes and dates of mortality. Chi-square and multivariable Cox regressions were employed for statistical analyses. RESULTS: Of 3360 women (median age: 54 years), the most isolated, very isolated, somewhat isolated, and not isolated comprised 14.5, 30.2, 37.1, and 18.2% of the sample, respectively. The most isolated participants were more likely to have low income (56.8% vs 12.2%, p < 0.001), have fewer years of education (40.8% vs 12.3%; p < 0.001), have low physical activity (27.3% vs 14.7%; p < 0.003), be obese (32.5% vs 24.4%; p = 0.02), and be current smokers (34.2% vs 10.3%; p < 0.001) compared to the not isolated ones. Mean fibrinogen levels increased with degree of social isolation (p = 0.003), but C-reactive protein showed no association (p = 0.52). Kaplan-Meier estimates indicated higher cancer mortality rates among participants with elevated fibrinogen levels, though not with statistical significance (p = 0.08). Furthermore, there was no association between social isolation and cancer mortality (p = 0.54). On multivariate analysis, obesity (HR = 1.56; 95% CI: 1.11-2.18), higher education (HR = 1.36; 95% CI: 1.01-1.83), and smoking (HR = 4.42, 95% CI: 2.84-6.88) were independent predictors for cancer mortality, while high physical activity predicted for lower mortality from cancer (HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.51-0.87). However, social isolation was not a predictor. CONCLUSION: Social isolation among women was associated with an increased level of fibrinogen, but not associated with cancer mortality. The relationship between inflammation and cancer mortality warrants further investigation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Koh‐Bell et al. (2021) conducted a cross-sectional in Social isolation and cancer mortality (n=3,360). Social isolation vs. Not isolated was evaluated on Cancer mortality (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.28-2.06, p=0.58). Social isolation among women was not independently associated with cancer mortality (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.28-2.06), despite being associated with increased levels of the inflammatory marker fibrinogen.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: