Sedentary Behavior and Incident Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies

Abstract

Background

Sedentary behavior is ubiquitous in modern adults' daily lives and it has been suggested to be associated with incident cancer. However, the results have been inconsistent. In this study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies to clarify the association between sedentary behavior and incident cancer.

Method

PubMed and Embase databases were searched up to March 2014. All prospective cohort studies on the association between sedentary behavior and incident cancer were included. The summary relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using random effect model.

Results

A total of 17 prospective studies from 14 articles, including a total of 857,581 participants and 18,553 cases, were included in the analysis for sedentary behavior and risk of incident cancer. The overall meta-analysis suggested that sedentary behavior increased risk of cancer (RR = 1.20, 95%CI = 1.12–1.28), with no evidence of heterogeneity between studies (I² = 7.3%, P = 0.368). Subgroup analyses demonstrated that there were statistical associations between sedentary behavior and some cancer types (endometrial cancer: RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.08–1.53; colorectal cancer: RR = 1.30, 95%CI = 1.12–1.49; breast cancer: RR = 1.17, 95%CI = 1.03–1.33; lung cancer: RR = 1.27, 95%CI = 1.06–1.52). However, there was no association of sedentary behavior with ovarian cancer (RR = 1.26, 95%CI = 0.87–1.82), renal cell carcinoma (RR = 1.11, 95%CI = 0.87–1.41) or non-Hodgkin lymphoid neoplasms (RR = 1.09, 95%CI = 0.82–1.43).

Conclusion

The present meta-analysis suggested that prolonged sedentary behavior was independently associated with an increased risk of incident endometrial, colorectal, breast, and lung cancers, but not with ovarian cancer, renal cell carcinoma or non-Hodgkin lymphoid neoplasms.

About the Authors:

Dong Shen

* E-mail: [email protected] (DS); [email protected] (WM)

Affiliation: Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Jiangyin Hospital of Southeast University Medical College, Jiangyin, China

Weidong Mao

* E-mail: [email protected] (DS); [email protected] (WM)

Affiliation: Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Jiangyin Hospital of Southeast University Medical College, Jiangyin, China

Tao Liu

Affiliation: Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Jiangyin Hospital of Southeast University Medical College, Jiangyin, China

Qingfeng Lin

Affiliation: Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Jiangyin Hospital of Southeast University Medical College, Jiangyin, China

Xiangdong Lu

Affiliation: Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Jiangyin Hospital of Southeast University Medical College, Jiangyin, China

Qiong Wang

Affiliation: Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Jiangyin Hospital of Southeast University Medical College, Jiangyin, China

Feng Lin

Affiliation: Department of Oncology, The Affiliated Jiangyin Hospital of Southeast University Medical College, Jiangyin, China

Ulf Ekelund

Affiliations Department of Sport Medicine, Norwegian School of Sport Sciences, Oslo, Norway, MRC Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

Katrien Wijndaele

Affiliation: MRC Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom

Introduction

Sedentary behavior is ubiquitous in modern adults' daily lives [1]. It is defined as any waking behavior in a sitting or reclining posture, expending ≤1.5 times the resting energy demand (for example TV viewing, computer use, occupational sitting, reading, and sitting in a car) [2]. Sedentary behavior is distinct from physical inactivity (i.e. not meeting sufficient levels of moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA)) [2]. The time adults spend sedentary is relatively independent from their time spent in MVPA, for example, individuals may frequently participate in MVPA but still spend substantial amounts of their time sitting [3]. Estimates derived from objective accelerometry suggest that adults spend about 50–60% of their waking day sitting [4]. TV viewing in particular is one of the most prevalent sedentary behaviors, occupying 40% of daily leisure time in some European countries and about 50% in Australia and in the USA [5]. Sedentary behavior may have a detrimental effect on health outcomes, as shown by recent meta-analyses providing evidence that prolonged sedentary behavior increases the risk of the metabolic syndrome [6], type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and all-cause mortality [7]–[9].

To date, 16 prospective studies have examined the association between sedentary behavior and incident cancer [10]–[23], however, showing inconsistent findings. Although Lynch et al.[24] reviewed the association between sedentary behavior and risk of cancer in 2010, a meta-analysis quantifying the association between this highly prevalent behavior and incident cancer is currently lacking. In addition, 9 new articles related to this topic have been published since 2010 [15]–[23].

In this study, we restricted ourselves to reviewing prospective cohort studies since cross-sectional or case-control studies are subject to recall bias and even reverse causality. Thus, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all published prospective studies to further clarify the association between sedentary behavior and incident cancer.

Materials and Methods

Literature and search strategy

The major literature databases including PubMed and Embase were searched. Search terms were (sedentary lifestyle OR sedentary behavior OR sitting time OR watching TV OR TV viewing) and (cancer OR carcinoma OR tumor). The literature search was limited to English language. The literature search was updated on March 4, 2014.

Inclusion criteria and data extraction

Studies included in the meta-analysis met all the following inclusion criteria: (1) evaluated the association between sedentary behavior (total sitting time, occupational sitting time, leisure sitting time or TV viewing) and incident cancer; (2) used a prospective cohort design; (3) provided relative risks (RRs) or hazard ratios (HRs) with 95%CIs for highest versus lowest level of sedentary behavior. The following information was extracted from each study: (1) the first author; (2) publication year; (3) country name; (4) sex distribution; (5) age distribution of study population at baseline; (6) average duration of follow-up; (7) number of cases and study population; (8) types of cancer; (9) RR or HR with 95%CI for highest versus lowest level of sedentary behavior; (10) covariates used in adjustment. Two authors independently assessed the articles for compliance with the inclusion/exclusion criteria and resolved disagreements through discussion.

Statistical analysis

Random [25] effects model was used to calculate pooled RRs with 95%CIs for the highest versus the lowest level of sedentary behavior. Sensitivity analysis, after exclusion one study at each time, was applied to test the stability of the results. Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate the association between sedentary behavior and risk of types of cancer. In addition, we also tested the association between TV viewing and risk of cancer. Publication bias was assessed by Begg's test [26] and Egger's test [27] (P<0.05 was considered statistically significant). Statistical analysis was conducted using STATA version 11 (StataCorp LP, College Station, Texas, USA).

Results

Characteristics of included prospective studies

Following the literature search and selection, a total of 17 prospective studies from 14 publications were included in the meta-analysis examining the association between sedentary behavior and risk of incident cancer (Figure 1). The duration of follow-up ranged from 3.8 to 16 years. 13 studies originated from America, 2 study from Europe, and 2 studies from East Asia. The characteristics of included prospective studies are listed in Tables 1 and 2.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Figure 1. Flow diagram of literature search and study selection.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105709.g001

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 1. Characteristics of included prospective studies examining the association between sedentary behavior and incident cancer.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105709.t001

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Table 2. RRs and 95%CIs reported by included prospective studies examining the association between sedentary behavior and incident cancer.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105709.t002

Sedentary behavior and incident cancer

17 prospective studies from 14 articles were included in the meta-analysis, including a total of 857,581 participants and 18,553 cases. The overall meta-analysis suggested that sedentary behavior increased risk of cancer (RR = 1.20, 95%CI = 1.12–1.28), with no evidence of heterogeneity between studies (I² = 7.3%, P = 0.368) (Figure 2). Sensitivity analysis suggested that the result was stable, with ORs and 95%CIs ranging from 1.18 (1.11–1.26) to 1.22 (1.15–1.31). There was no publication bias (P = 0.202). It should be noted that RRs and 95% CIs with adjustment for potential confounding factors, such as BMI, physical activity and energy intake, from all included studies were pooled together using meta-analysis.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Figure 2. Forest plot of the association between sedentary behavior and risk of incident cancer (highest versus lowest level).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105709.g002

In the subgroup analyses (Figure 3), there were statistical associations between sedentary behavior and some cancer types (endometrial cancer: RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.08–1.53; colorectal cancer: RR = 1.30, 95%CI = 1.12–1.49; breast cancer: RR = 1.17, 95%CI = 1.03–1.33; lung cancer: RR = 1.27, 95%CI = 1.06–1.52). However, there was no association of sedentary behavior with ovarian cancer (RR = 1.26, 95%CI = 0.87–1.82), renal cell carcinoma (RR = 1.11, 95%CI = 0.87–1.41) or non-Hodgkin lymphoid neoplasms (RR = 1.09, 95%CI = 0.82–1.43).

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Figure 3. Forest plot of the association between sedentary behavior and risk of incident cancer by cancer site (highest versus lowest level).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105709.g003

Since TV viewing is the main type of sedentary behavior, we also investigated the association between TV viewing and risk of cancer. The results suggested that sedentary behavior increased the risk of cancer (RR = 1.21, 95%CI = 1.08–1.35) (Figure 4). We did not performed subgroup analyses based on type of cancer again because of limited studies for each cancer type.

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Figure 4. Forest plot of the association between TV viewing and risk of incident cancer (highest versus lowest level).

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105709.g004

Discussion

Our meta-analyses suggest that prolonged sedentary behavior is associated with an increased risk of some cancer types including colorectal, lung, breast, and endometrial cancers, but not with ovarian cancer, renal cell carcinoma or non-Hodgkin lymphoid neoplasms. The positive association was independent of traditional risk factors including BMI, physical activity and energy intake.

In many Western countries, adults spend large proportions of their awake time sedentary. It is estimated that the average US population spends about 35 h/week watching TV, 2 h/week watching time-shifted TV, and 4 h/week on the internet [28]. Although insufficient physical activity has long been considered as a risk factor of many chronic diseases (e.g., type 2 diabetes [29], coronary heart disease [30], cancer [31]) and all-cause mortality [32], examining the independent relationships between sedentary time and health outcomes is fairly recent. In 2011, a meta-analysis performed by Grøntved and Hu [7] reported that each 2-hour increment of TV viewing daily was associated with increased risk of type 2 diabetes (RR 1.20, 95%CI = 1.14–1.27), cardiovascular disease (RR 1.15, 95%CI = 1.06–1.23), and all-cause mortality (RR = 1.13, 95%CI 1.07–1.18). Another meta-analysis by Ford and Caspersen [9] demonstrated a RR of 1.05 (95%CI = 1.01–1.09) for every 2-hour/day increase for the association between sedentary behavior and cardiovascular events. Most recently, Cong et al. [33] reported that sedentary behavior was associated with an increased risk of colon cancer. However, their conclusion is mainly based on case-control studies and also they did not examine the association between sedentary behavior and risk of other types of cancer.

Several plausible mechanisms may explain the observed association between sedentary behavior and risk of some cancers. First, when a substantial amount of time is spent sitting, especially in front of the TV, this automatically means less physical activity, and it may lead to a higher energy intake [34], both which affect energy balance in such a way that possibly overweight/obesity results. However, the observed associations remained when adjusting for BMI or WC, energy intake, and physical activity. In addition, BMI or WC may then act more like a confounder. As is known, obese individuals are more prone to stay sedentary than non-obese ones. Second, excessive sitting time could increase levels of inflammatory factors such as tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6, and leptin which are known risk predictors for cancer [35]. Third, sitting time has been hypothesized to influence sex hormones which could affect immune function [24].

Strengths of our meta-analysis include the prospective design, large sample size, long duration of follow-up, and ability to control for many potential confounding factors for the included studies. However, several limitations should be considered. First, sedentary behavior time in all included studies was self-reported, which could have resulted in the possibility of exposure misclassification and thereby underestimation of the true association between sedentary behavior and risk of cancer. Second, sedentary behavior was only measured at baseline for most included studies, and individuals may have changed their sedentary lifestyle during follow-up. This misclassification may also attenuate the true association. Third, although many potential confounding factors have been adjusted for, residual confounding because of poorly measured or unmeasured confounding factors may influence our results, particularly also for MVPA, a key confounding variable [36]. In addition, we can not rule out residual confounding of smoking on lung cancer. Fourth, we were unable to distinguish between most types of sitting (i.e., TV viewing, reading, using computer, sitting at work) which may have different levels of energy expenditure or be associated with different underlying confounding structures. Fifth, there was limited number of studies for each cancer site. However, the total number of cancer cases for each cancer site was relatively large (all n>1000 for each cancer site). Sixth, the included 17 studies adjusted for different confounding factors, which might have influenced the results.

In this study, we found significant associations between sedentary behavior and risk of some types of cancer including colorectal, lung, breast, and endometrial cancers. Public health guidelines for prevention and control of incident cancer may need to consider recommendations about reducing time spent sitting in addition to increasing MVPA. Actually, World Cancer Research Fund report has already made a statement on the importance of limiting sedentary behavior. Our current findings based on prospective studies further supported this statement.

Supporting Information

[Figure omitted. See PDF.]

Checklist S1.

PRISMA checklist.

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105709.s001

(DOC)

Author Contributions

Conceived and designed the experiments: WM DS. Performed the experiments: TL QL XL. Analyzed the data: QW FL WM. Contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools: UE KW. Contributed to the writing of the manuscript: DS KW UE.

Citation: Shen D, Mao W, Liu T, Lin Q, Lu X, Wang Q, et al. (2014) Sedentary Behavior and Incident Cancer: A Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies. PLoS ONE 9(8): e105709. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105709

References

1. Hamilton MT, Healy GN, Dunstan DW, Zderic TW, Owen N (2008) Too little exercise and too much sitting: inactivity physiology and the need for new recommendations on sedentary behavior. Curr Cardiovasc Risk Rep 2: 292–298.

2. Sedentary Behaviour Research Network (2012) Letter to the editor: standardized use of the terms “sedentary” and “sedentary behaviours”. Appl Physiol Nutr Metab 37: 540–542.

3. Craft LL, Zderic TW, Gapstur SM, Vaniterson EH, Thomas DM, et al. (2012) Evidence that women meeting physical activity guidelines do not sit less: an observational inclinometry study. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act 9: 122.

4. Healy GN, Matthews CE, Dunstan DW, Winkler EA, Owen N (2011) Sedentary time and cardio-metabolic biomarkers in US adults: NHANES 2003–06. Eur Heart J 32: 590–397.

5. Bureau of Labor Statistics. American Time Use Survey—2012 Results. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/atus.pdf. Accessed September 5, 2013.

6. Edwardson CL, Gorely T, Davies MJ, Gray LJ, Khunti K, et al. (2012) Association of sedentary behaviour with metabolic syndrome: a meta-analysis. Plos One 7: e34916.

7. Grøntved A, Hu FB (2011) Television viewing and risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and all-cause mortality: a meta-analysis. JAMA 305: 2448–2455.

8. Wilmot EG, Edwardson CL, Achana FA, Davies MJ, Gorely T, et al. (2012) Sedentary time in adults and the association with diabetes, cardiovascular disease and death: systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetologia 55: 2895–2905.

9. Ford ES, Caspersen CJ (2012) Sedentary behaviour and cardiovascular disease: a review of prospective studies. Int J Epidemiol 41: 1338–1353.

10. Friberg E, Mantzoros CS, Wolk A (2006) Physical activity and risk of endometrial cancer: a population-based prospective cohort study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15: 2136–2140.

11. Patel AV, Rodriguez C, Pavluck AL, Thun MJ, Calle EE (2006) Recreational physical activity and sedentary behavior in relation to ovarian cancer risk in a large cohort of US women. Am J Epidemiol 163: 709–716.

12. Patel AV, Feigelson HS, Talbot JT, McCullough ML, Rodriguez C, et al. (2008) The role of body weight in the relationship between physical activity and endometrial cancer: results from a large cohort of US women. Int J Cancer 123: 1877–1882.

13. Howard RA, Freedman DM, Park Y, Hollenbeck A, Schatzkin A, et al. (2008) Physical activity, sedentary behavior, and the risk of colon and rectal cancer in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. Cancer Causes Control 19: 939–953.

14. Gierach GL, Chang SC, Brinton LA, Lacey JV Jr, Hollenbeck AR, et al. (2009) Physical activity, sedentary behavior, and endometrial cancer risk in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. Int J Cancer 124: 2139–2147.

15. George SM, Irwin ML, Matthews CE, Mayne ST, Gail MH, et al. (2010) Beyond recreational physical activity: examining occupational and household activity, transportation activity, and sedentary behavior in relation to postmenopausal breast cancer risk. Am J Public Health 100: 2288–2295.

16. George SM, Moore SC, Chow WH, Schatzkin A, Hollenbeck AR, et al. (2011) A prospective analysis of prolonged sitting time and risk of renal cell carcinoma among 300,000 older adults. Ann Epidemiol 21: 787–790.

17. Pronk A, Ji BT, Shu XO, Chow WH, Xue S, et al. (2011) Physical activity and breast cancer risk in Chinese women. Br J Cancer 105: 1443–1450.

18. Teras LR, Gapstur SM, Diver WR, Birmann BM, Patel AV (2012) Recreational physical activity, leisure sitting time and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoid neoplasms in the American Cancer Society Cancer Prevention Study II Cohort. Int J Cancer 131: 1912–1920.

19. Cohen SS, Matthews CE, Bradshaw PT, Lipworth L, Buchowski MS, et al. (2013) Sedentary behavior, physical activity, and likelihood of breast cancer among Black and White women: a report from the Southern Community Cohort Study. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 6: 566–576.

20. Lam TK, Moore SC, Brinton LA, Smith L, Hollenbeck AR, et al. (2013) Anthropometric measures and physical activity and the risk of lung cancer in never-smokers: a prospective cohort study. Plos One 8: e70672.

21. Simons CC, Hughes LA, van Engeland M, Goldbohm RA, van den Brandt PA, et al. (2013) Physical activity, occupational sitting time, and colorectal cancer risk in the Netherlands cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 177: 514–530.

22. Ukawa S, Tamakoshi A, Wakai K, Noda H, Ando M, et al. (2013) Prospective cohort study on television viewing time and incidence of lung cancer: findings from the Japan Collaborative Cohort Study. Cancer Causes Control 24: 1547–1553.

23. Xiao Q, Yang HP, Wentzensen N, Hollenbeck A, Matthews CE (2013) Physical activity in different periods of life, sedentary behavior and the risk of ovarian cancer in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers [Epub ahead of print].

24. Lynch BM (2010) Sedentary behavior and cancer: a systematic review of the literature and proposed biological mechanisms. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 19: 2691–2709.

25. Mantel N, Haenszel W (1959) Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 22: 719–748.

26. Begg CB, Mazumdar M (1994) Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics 50: 1088–1101.

27. Egger M, Davey Smith G, Schneider M, Minder C (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315: 629–634.

28. The Nielsen Company. Three Screen Report. http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2010/what-consumers-watch-nielsens-q1-2010-three-screen-report.html.Accessed September 7, 2013.

29. Avery L, Flynn D, van Wersch A, Sniehotta FF, Trenell MI (2012) Changing physical activity behavior in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of behavioral interventions. Diabetes Care 35: 2681–2689.

30. Sattelmair J, Pertman J, Ding EL, Kohl HW 3rd, Haskell W, et al. (2011) Dose response between physical activity and risk of coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis. Circulation 124: 789–795.

31. Robsahm TE, Aagnes B, Hjartåker A, Langseth H, Bray FI, et al.. (2013) Body mass index, physical activity, and colorectal cancer by anatomical subsites: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Eur J Cancer [Epub ahead of print].

32. Lollgen H, Bockenhoff A, Knapp G (2009) Physical activity and all-cause mortality: an updated meta-analysis with different intensity categories. Int J Sports Med 30: 213–224.

33. Cong YJ, Gan Y, Sun HL, Deng J, Cao SY, et al. (2014) Association of sedentary behaviour with colon and rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Br J Cancer 110: 817–826.

34. Wijndaele K, Brage S, Besson H, Khaw KT, Sharp SJ, et al. (2011) Television viewing time independently predicts all-cause and cardiovascular mortality: the EPIC Norfolk study. Int J Epidemiol 40: 150–159.

35. van Kruijsdijk RC, van der Wall E, Visseren FL (2009) Obesity and cancer: the role of dysfunctional adipose tissue. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 18: 2569–2578.

36. Ekelund U (2012) Commentary: Too much sitting—a public health threat? Int J Epidemiol 41: 1353–1455.