Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Aim: To investigate the association and quantify the relationship between diabetes mellitus (DM) and gastric cancer (GC) by an updated meta-analysis.
Methods: The initial PubMed search identified 1233 publications. Studies not reporting GC or those not reporting actual number of GC were excluded. Twelve pertinent studies were retrieved from the PubMed database or from a manual search and considered for the meta-analysis. Pooled risk ratios and 95%CI were estimated by a random-effects model. Subgroup analysis was performed according to gender or geographical regions. Heterogeneity and publication bias were evaluated by I (2) and funnel plot analysis, respectively.
Results: DM was significantly associated with GC with a RR of 1.41 (P = 0.006) (95%CI: 1.10-1.81). Subgroup analyses revealed that both sexes showed a significant association with GC, with a greater magnitude of risk in females (RR = 1.90; 95%CI: 1.27-2.85; P = 0.002) than in males (RR = 1.24; 95%CI: 1.08-1.43; P = 0.002). In addition, the link between DM and GC was significant in East Asian DM patients (RR = 1.77; 95%CI: 1.38-2.26; P < 0.00001) but not in Western DM patients (RR = 1.23; 95%CI: 0.90-1.68; P = 0.2). There was no evidence of publication bias, but the results indicated significant heterogeneity.
Conclusion: This updated meta-analysis has provided evidence of positive DM-GC associations. The limited information on potentially important clinical confounding factors in each study deserves further investigation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3812492 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3748/wjg.v19.i40.6902 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!