Sleep Apnea Tied to Increased Cancer Risk

[user from Singapore]

Nate,

I read that the tobacco industry has traditionally been one of the most important industries in North Carolina. Maybe there is a correlation

[avi123]

I have to say that those correlations, if they are real, are indeed quite disturbing, especially because the number of people they report are not small. This deserves more research.

I haven't read the story in detail, but what I did read suggested that there is just an association. Did they monitor people who did not have sleep apnea? For a population study, 5200 people is not a large group, especially if the number who actually develop cancer is small. Absolutely agree that this deserves more research. However, to do proper research in this area is going to be expensive, and take a long time. If anyone/any group has the time and resources to do this work, it will be very interesting. Meantime I will accept the research that has shown that hypoxia is associated with inflammation, and the research that shows that inflammation is associated with many illnesses - cancer, arthritis, obesity, diabetes, etc., and continue to work on keeping my AHI as low as possible. Until someone develops a better and safer method of eliminating sleep apnea, I think my CPAP is a wonderful thing!

Comment,

I agree with you especially if the study is done statistically correct (DOUBLE BLIND] and repeated by several institutions. But according to Dr Colin Sullivan it has nothing to do with the AHIs. Read his report thru the link on my signature line.

[NateS]

I haven't read the story in detail, but what I did read suggested that there is just an association. Did they monitor people who did not have sleep apnea?…

No, my impression is that they compared the number of cancer deaths among the monitored people, all of whom had been diagnosed with sleep apnea, with the number of cancer deaths in the population at large.

In one of the new studies, researchers in Spain followed thousands of patients at sleep clinics and found that those with the most severe forms of sleep apnea had a 65 percent greater risk of developing cancer of any kind. The second study, of about 1,500 government workers in Wisconsin, showed that those with the most breathing abnormalities at night had five times the rate of dying from cancer as people without the sleep disorder. Both research teams only looked at cancer diagnoses and outcomes in general, without focusing on any specific type of cancer.

However, they then state that "the researchers ruled out the possibility that the usual risk factors for cancer, like age, smoking, alcohol use, physical activity and weight, could have played a role." but it is not clear yet how they ruled those factors out and whether they ruled them out in the apnea group, the general population statistics or both.

In both studies, being presented in San Francisco this week at an international conference organized by the American Thoracic Society, the researchers ruled out the possibility that the usual risk factors for cancer, like age, smoking, alcohol use, physical activity and weight, could have played a role. The association between cancer and disordered breathing at night remained even after they adjusted these and other variables.

Hopefully, more details may come out at the conference this week in San Francisco.

Regards, Nate

[dtsm]

Looks like all the cherry pickers are out in full force today.

It's not conclusive and obviously more work will be done. Most of us here know OSA needs to be treated, regardless of whether it's a potential cancer agent or not, right?

[GatorLord]

I can't speak to the CPAP part of this dialogue, since this is my first post and I'm still waiting on my DME to contact me and get me set up for an APAP; but I can speak to certain statistics and regression analysis.

The way this particular style of statistics works (regressing correlations) is transpositionally different from 'double blind' studies of medication effects. The first uses some effect and seeks to discover with stats what drivers might be correlated significantly and how much. The other seeks to discover which effects a particular driver manifests and to what extent...think regressive vs progressive.

Studying a large population (n = 5,200) with large subpopulations (cancer is an unfortunately high incidence disorder) and regressing out the strength and statistical power of various coefficients (the 'X's) against some selected 'Y' variable ('n' with cancer) is straightforward and defensible. The authors didn't include all the details, but a coefficient of 4.8x for sleep apnea is robust as effects go. It would be helpful to know the 'p' value, but it must be below .05 or they wouldn't have risked publication, making these findings unlikely a matter of chance. Correlation doesn't equal causation, but it greatly aids the investigation. If these findings are borne out by others, it will become a milestone discovery for both conditions I suspect.

These large epidemiological regression type of studies benefit from the inclusion of many, many variables and letting the power of modern computers tell you which are significant; whereas, the 'double blind' type seeks to keep the variables to a minimum (hence removing researcher effects by 'blinding') in order to isolate the true effects of the studied agent.

I for one find the report very helpful and disturbing...it seems SA is much more of a bad actor than most realized, and it was already an A-list villain.

[dtsm]

I for one find the report very helpful and disturbing...it seems SA is much more of a bad actor than most realized, and it was already an A-list villain.

Welcome to cpaptalk.com and best of luck with your new toy.

[GatorLord]

I for one find the report very helpful and disturbing...it seems SA is much more of a bad actor than most realized, and it was already an A-list villain.

Welcome to cpaptalk.com and best of luck with your new toy.

Thank you...it's been a long journey, but a relief to finally have a confirmed diagnosis of something that has a proven, drug-free treatment. I'm very hopeful.

[NateS]

I can't speak to the CPAP part of this dialogue, since this is my first post and I'm still waiting on my DME to contact me and get me set up for an APAP; but I can speak to certain statistics and regression analysis.

The way this particular style of statistics works (regressing correlations) is transpositionally different from 'double blind' studies of medication effects. The first uses some effect and seeks to discover with stats what drivers might be correlated significantly and how much. The other seeks to discover which effects a particular driver manifests and to what extent...think regressive vs progressive.

Studying a large population (n = 5,200) with large subpopulations (cancer is an unfortunately high incidence disorder) and regressing out the strength and statistical power of various coefficients (the 'X's) against some selected 'Y' variable ('n' with cancer) is straightforward and defensible. The authors didn't include all the details, but a coefficient of 4.8x for sleep apnea is robust as effects go. It would be helpful to know the 'p' value, but it must be below .05 or they wouldn't have risked publication, making these findings unlikely a matter of chance. Correlation doesn't equal causation, but it greatly aids the investigation. If these findings are borne out by others, it will become a milestone discovery for both conditions I suspect.

These large epidemiological regression type of studies benefit from the inclusion of many, many variables and letting the power of modern computers tell you which are significant; whereas, the 'double blind' type seeks to keep the variables to a minimum (hence removing researcher effects by 'blinding') in order to isolate the true effects of the studied agent.

I for one find the report very helpful and disturbing...it seems SA is much more of a bad actor than most realized, and it was already an A-list villain.

Thank you very much for backing me up here - I feel a lot less "flimsy" now!

Regards, Nate

[portiemom]

Nate, you're not flimsy, you look very substantial in your photo, and I always enjoy your posts, and they give me something to think and research about. That said, really, I would probably be dead due to a car accident or fall without my cpap, and yes I bet with all the cancer causes out there, going without cpap would probably give you some form of it.

[avi123]

A barrage of cancers and Parkinson's is upon us but if Nate's avatar is him then I'll change my posts and give him more respect. It reminds me of a certain Russian Bolshevik.

[ems]

A barrage of cancers and Parkinson's is upon us but if Nate's avatar is him then I'll change my posts and give him more respect.

I suggest you do that anyway, tho I doubt that Nate's avatar is Nate. Maybe a Russian Bolshevik...

[portiemom]

DUH, what not Nate, ya think!

[ems]

This is on MSNBC/Brian Williams right now.

If one has untreated sleep apnea, there is a "68% risk of any type of cancer".

I don't want to believe that... but, it's what I just heard.

[NateS]

Nate, you're not flimsy, you look very substantial in your photo, and I always enjoy your posts, and they give me something to think and research about.…

Thanks for the kind words, portiemom! And ems!

It could be anybody, but to me it's Rip Van Winkle BEFORE he laid down and took his nap in the "Kaatskill Mts" as Washington Irving called them!

Nate

Hey, I've gotten so used to seeing my avatar on cpaptalk that I'm always shocked to see that other guy in the mirror when I walk into the bedroom!

Especially since sometimes it seems like I spend more time here than in there.

Regards, Nate

[SleepyT]

All studies aside, doesn't it make intuitive sense that oxygen deprivation would cause disease in the body? To all systems...in all cells? I would think yes...your risk of everything goes up...diabetes, cancer, hypertension...fill in the blank! Our bodies need a certain amount of O2 for our systems to function in a healthy way. Any thing less...and disease and disorder will surely follow. Maybe I'm being too simplistic...but the news about an increased cancer risk is not suprising in the least to me.