Stress does not cause cancer, concludes new meta-analysis

Stress does not cause cancer, concluded a new meta-analysis involving Canadian researchers, debunking a myth deeply rooted in popular belief.The only exception might be lung cancer, but even then, the correlation found with stress is quite modest and becomes even weaker when other factors are added to the equation.“We forget that there are several known risk factors for cancer that are based on science,” commented Marie-Ève Pelland, a professor and psychologist in the Department of Radiation Oncology at the Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal. “However, people prefer to believe that they have control in other areas, like stress management, as a form of preventative action.”The study authors drew their conclusions from an analysis of nearly 422,000 patients from Canada, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and Norway. After 15 years of follow-up, they found no evidence that psychosocial factors increase the overall risk of cancer.The results of the analysis, the authors wrote, “indicate that for overall cancer and for most types of cancer, a single measurement of perceived social support, recent loss of an immediate family member, relationship status, neuroticism and general distress was not associated with an increased risk of incidence.”However, they specified that how people react to stress could increase their risk of developing cancer. So if an individual turns to tobacco, alcohol or a lower-quality diet to cope with the situation, they will be exposing themselves to genuine cancer risk factors, the researchers warned.The data is somewhat less clear regarding lung cancer, as the potential link between the disease and stress remains unclear in this case.“The effects of depression, anxiety, perceived social support, recent loss and relationship status . . . could be reflected by a common factor such as loneliness, which has previously also been shown to be linked to lung cancer incidence,” the study authors explained. “Loneliness and social isolation have been linked to neurophysiological responses too, which may explain the increased risk for lung cancer also.”Furthermore, when factors such as smoking or a family history of breast cancer are taken into account, the association almost completely disappears, the researchers noted.Cancer patients, especially in the absence of obvious risk factors, seek to understand and explain why they are ill, said Marie-Ève Pelland, and it is not uncommon to hear them point to their stress management in their lives.“Our brains are wired to look for reasons,” said Ms. Pelland. “And when we can’t pinpoint them, we feel a sense of helplessness.” In this context, a meta-analysis showing that stress is very likely not a factor is both good and bad news, she emphasized. Good news, because it can alleviate the guilt of patients who attribute their illness to stress they believe they have poorly managed. But also bad news, because it simultaneously deprives them of the explanation they are seeking to understand what is happening to them. “I mean, I understand, I’ve been through a significant event, the loss of a spouse or something like that, sometimes people find some relief from that feeling of helplessness, but on the other hand, it creates guilt,” said Ms. Pelland.The best way to regain control, she concluded, is to focus on the things we actually control, such as attending medical appointments, our diet or our sleep. The results of the meta-analysis were published in the medical journal Cancer.ReferencevanTuijl LA, Pan K-Y, Basten M, et coll. Psychosocial factors and the risk of cancer: an individual-participant data meta-analysis. Cancer. 2026;e70271. doi:10.1002/cncr.70271 This article has been translated from its original French.

Stress does not cause cancer, concludes new meta-analysis

Register for free access or login.

Related Topics