Cited by 348Cancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune ResponseStress Responses and CortisolCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism

Stress and cancer: mechanisms, significance and future directions

Eckerling, Anabel, Ricon-Becker, Itay, Sorski, Liat, Sandbank, Elad, Ben-Eliyahu, Shamgar·2021·Nature Reviews Cancer

Abstract

The notion that stress and cancer are interlinked has dominated lay discourse for decades. More recent animal studies indicate that stress can substantially facilitate cancer progression through modulating most hallmarks of cancer, and molecular and systemic mechanisms mediating these effects have been elucidated. However, available clinical evidence for such deleterious effects is inconsistent, as epidemiological and stress-reducing clinical interventions have yielded mixed effects on cancer mortality. In this Review, we describe and discuss specific mediating mechanisms identified by preclinical research, and parallel clinical findings. We explain the discrepancy between preclinical and clinical outcomes, through pointing to experimental strengths leveraged by animal studies and through discussing methodological and conceptual obstacles that prevent clinical studies from reflecting the impacts of stress. We suggest approaches to circumvent such obstacles, based on targeting critical phases of cancer progression that are more likely to be stress-sensitive; pharmacologically limiting adrenergic-inflammatory responses triggered by medical procedures; and focusing on more vulnerable populations, employing personalized pharmacological and psychosocial approaches. Recent clinical trials support our hypothesis that psychological and/or pharmacological inhibition of excess adrenergic and/or inflammatory stress signalling, especially alongside cancer treatments, could save lives.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41568-021-00395-5

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a longitudinal study of chronic pain patients (n = 133), those with arthritis, back or neck pain, or multiple comorbid pain conditions experienced significant improvements in pain intensity and functional limitations after participating in a BSRP.

    “Between 1997 and 2003, a longitudinal study of chronic pain patients (n = 133) showed that those with arthritis, back or neck pain, or multiple comorbid pain conditions experienced significant improvements in pain intensity and functional limitations after participating in a Behavioral Stress Reduction Program (BSRP) [10,11].”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 329 · Cited by 348

Authors
Eckerling, A., Ricon-Becker, I., Sorski, L., Sandbank, E., & Ben-Eliyahu, S.
Affiliations
Tel Aviv University (IL)
Venue
Nature Reviews Cancer
Published
2021-09-10
Volume
21
Issue
12
Pages
767-785
ISSN
  • 1474-175X (ISSN-L)
  • 1474-1768
OpenAlex
W3196865736
Cited by
348
References
329
Citations by year
2026: 69 · 2025: 98 · 2024: 74 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1
FWCI
8.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature reviews. Cancer (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Cancer, Stress, Anesthesia, and Immune Response
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Keywords
psychological stress, tumor progression, cancer hallmarks, inflammation, cancer mortality, psychosocial interventions
MeSH terms
Animals, Humans, Neoplasms

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review