Results Study characteristics selleck chemical Nineteen studies met the search inclusion and exclusion criteria. The characteristics of included studies are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Table 1 Characteristics of cohort studies of metabolic syndrome and prostate cancer risk Author yr (ref. no.) Country Population Mean age, yr Mean FU time, yr Time period Cohort size Definition of MetS No. of cases RRs 95% CI Controlled variables Laukkanen 2004 [11] Finland Kuopio communities 52.6 15 1984-2001 1,880 WHO 56 RR 1.90 1.1-3.5 Age Tande 2006 [12] United States ARIC* (49% white, 51% African American) 45-64 12.1 1987-2000 6,429 NCEP-ATP-III

385 RR 0.77 0.60-0.98 Age, race Russo 2008 [13] Italy A pharmacologically based diagnosis 40 2.7 1999-2005 NA A pharmacologically based diagnosis 94 RR 0.93 0.75-1.14 Age Martin 2009 [14] Norway HUNT2 48 ± 16.4 9.3 1996-2005 29,364 NCEP-ATP-III 687 RR 0.91 0.77-1.09 Age+ Inoue 2009 [15] Japan Japan PHC population 40-69 10.2 1993-2004 9,548 IDF 119 HR 0.76 0.47-1.22 Age+ Grundmark 2010 [16] Sweden ULSAM 50 30.3 1970-2003 2,183 NCEP-ATP-III 226 RR 1.29 0.89-1.88 Age 2,287 IDF 234 RR 1.18 0.81-1.71 Wallner 2010 [17] United States Olmsted

County 40-79 15 1990-NA 2,445 WHO 206 HR 0.65 0.37-1.10 Age Osaki 2011 [18] Japan The population-based cancer registry 60.5 ± 10.8 9.3 1992-2007 8,239 NCEP-ATP-III 152 PI3K Inhibitor Library cost HR 1.37 0.91-2.06 Age 8,239 IDF 152 HR 1.18 0.74-1.90 Häggström 2012 [19] Norway Me-Can 44 12 NA 289,866 Upper quartile levels ATP-III criteria 6,922 RR 0.96 0.92-1.00 Age+ Sweden Austria MetS = metabolic syndrome; PCa = prostate cancer; RRs = Relative risks; CI = confidence interval; Age + =At least age; WHO = World Health Organization; NCEP-ATP-III = National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III; IDF = International Diabetes Federation; HUNT 2 = Nord-Trondelang Health Study; ARIC = Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities; OR = odds ratio; *We Methisazone use White-American data.

Table 2 Characteristics of studies of metabolic syndrome and parameters of prostate cancer Author yr (ref. of cases Outcomes RRs 95% CI B.K 2007 [29] Korea Cross-section study Patients who underwent radical retropubic prostatectomy 64.8 ± 6.2 2004-2006 NCEP-ATP-III 261 Gleason score ≥7(4 + 3) 0.972 0.637-1.482 Clinical stage ≥ T3 0.991 0.532-1.846 Beebe-Dimmer 2009 [20] United States https://www.selleckchem.com/ALK.html Case-control study GECAP 62.3 1999-2004 NCEP-ATP-III 637 Gleason score ≥7(4 + 3) 1.2 0.64-2.27 Clinical stage ≥ T3 1.17 0.55-2.51 Castillejos-Molina 2011 [23] Mexico Case-control study Patients with PC who underwent surgical treatment 64.8 ± 6.97 1990-2007 WHO 210 Gleason score >7 3.346 1.144-9.791 Clinical stage ≥ T3 1.628 0.915-2.896 Kheterpal 2012 [24] United States Cross-section study Patients who underwent robot assisted radical prostatectomy 60.7 ± 6.