Measuring the biological embedding of chronic stress: Allostatic load algorithms and cancer risk in a prospective cohort.
Redondo-Sánchez D, Gálvez-Navas JM, González Flores E, et al.
Social Science & Medicine · 2026
What the research tells us
In this nested case-control analysis, clinical-cutoff allostatic load indices had better model fit than the alternative algorithms examined. This supports comparing scoring choices for a specified outcome.
Scope & interpretation
Observational, outcome-specific evidence; the abstract cannot establish a causal stress pathway or validate a cancer screening tool. Full methods and supplements were not examined.
Study at a glance
- POPULATION & SAMPLE
- 1,910 participants: 955 incident cancer cases and 955 matched controls.
- EXPOSURE / INTERVENTION / SUBJECT
- Sixteen biomarkers scored using four allostatic load algorithms.
- OUTCOMES
- Cancer associations and comparison of model fit across algorithms.
- TIME FRAME
- Nested analysis of a prospective cohort; the follow-up interval is not established in this abstract-based note.
Cited on this site
Editorial & review record
Record for v1.0 · Updated
Editorial responsibility: TAP Editorial Team
Editorial note
Under the editorial responsibility of the TAP Editorial Team, this publication used AI assistance for content organization and editing.
Download detailed editorial record (JSON) ↓
How responsibilities and review are recorded ↗Scope of this reading note
Bibliographic record and abstract. Published online on 17 September 2026, assigned to the November 2026 issue.
- Study funding
- Funding and competing-interest details have not been verified against the full text. Consult the original publication’s declarations.
- Competing interests
- Funding and competing-interest details have not been verified against the full text. Consult the original publication’s declarations.
Project support
Founded and supported by Resilio.
Read the editorial standards ↗