Leisure-time physical activity and gastric cancer risk: A pooled study within the Stomach cancer Pooling (StoP) Project

Background: Although physical activity (PA) has been recognized as a favourable factor in the prevention of various diseases, including certain forms of cancer, the relationship between PA and gastric cancer (GC) is not yet fully understood. This study aims to provide data from a pooled analysis of case-control studies within the Stomach cancer Pooling (StoP) Project to estimate the association between leisure-time PA and the occurrence of GC. Methods: Six case-control studies from StoP project collected data on leisure-time PA, for a total of 2,343 cases and 8,614 controls. Subjects were classified into three leisure-time PA categories, either none/low, intermediate or high, based on study-specific tertiles. We used a two-stage approach. Firstly, we applied multivariable logistic regression models to obtain study-specific odds ratios (ORs) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) then, we used a random-effect models to obtain pooled effect estimates. We performed stratified analyses according to demographic, lifestyle and clinical covariates. Results: The meta-analysis showed ORs of GC with no significant differences between intermediate vs low and high vs low PA level (OR 1.05 [95%CI 0.76–1.45]; OR 1.23 [95%CI 0.78–1.94], respectively). GC risk estimates did not strongly differ across strata of selected covariates except for age ≤ 55 years old (high vs low level: OR 0.72 [95%CI 0.55–0.94]) and for control population-based studies (high vs low level: OR 0.79 [95%CI 0.68–0.93]). Conclusions: No association was found between leisure time PA and GC, apart from a slight suggestion of decreased risk below age 55 and in control population-based studies. These results may reflect specific characteristics of GC at a younger age, or the presence of a cohort effect mediating and interacting with socioeconomic determinants of GC The different distribution of PA levels among hospitalized controls could have led to an underestimated effect of PA on GC risk.