Displaying all 2 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Bamia C, Orfanos P, Juerges H, Schöttker B, Brenner H, Lorbeer R, et al.
    Maturitas, 2017 Sep;103:37-44.
    PMID: 28778331 DOI: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2017.06.023
    OBJECTIVES: To evaluate, among the elderly, the association of self-rated health (SRH) with mortality, and to identify determinants of self-rating health as "at-least-good".

    STUDY DESIGN: Individual data on SRH and important covariates were obtained for 424,791 European and United States residents, ≥60 years at recruitment (1982-2008), in eight prospective studies in the Consortium on Health and Ageing: Network of Cohorts in Europe and the United States (CHANCES). In each study, adjusted mortality ratios (hazard ratios, HRs) in relation to SRH were calculated and subsequently combined with random-effect meta-analyses.

    MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: All-cause, cardiovascular and cancer mortality.

    RESULTS: Within the median 12.5 years of follow-up, 93,014 (22%) deaths occurred. SRH "fair" or "poor" vs. "at-least-good" was associated with increased mortality: HRs 1.46 (95% CI 1·23-1.74) and 2.31 (1.79-2.99), respectively. These associations were evident: for cardiovascular and, to a lesser extent, cancer mortality, and within-study, within-subgroup analyses. Accounting for lifestyle, sociodemographic, somatometric factors and, subsequently, for medical history explained only a modest amount of the unadjusted associations. Factors favourably associated with SRH were: sex (males), age (younger-old), education (high), marital status (married/cohabiting), physical activity (active), body mass index (non-obese), alcohol consumption (low to moderate) and previous morbidity (absence).

    CONCLUSION: SRH provides a quick and simple tool for assessing health and identifying groups of elders at risk of early mortality that may be useful also in clinical settings. Modifying determinants of favourably rating health, e.g. by increasing physical activity and/or by eliminating obesity, may be important for older adults to "feel healthy" and "be healthy".

  2. Yu D, Zheng W, Johansson M, Lan Q, Park Y, White E, et al.
    J Natl Cancer Inst, 2018 Aug 01;110(8):831-842.
    PMID: 29518203 DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djx286
    BACKGROUND: The obesity-lung cancer association remains controversial. Concerns over confounding by smoking and reverse causation persist. The influence of obesity type and effect modifications by race/ethnicity and tumor histology are largely unexplored.

    METHODS: We examined associations of body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), and waist-hip ratio (WHR) with lung cancer risk among 1.6 million Americans, Europeans, and Asians. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) with adjustment for potential confounders. Analyses for WC/WHR were further adjusted for BMI. The joint effect of BMI and WC/WHR was also evaluated.

    RESULTS: During an average 12-year follow-up, 23 732 incident lung cancer cases were identified. While BMI was generally associated with a decreased risk, WC and WHR were associated with increased risk after controlling for BMI. These associations were seen 10 years before diagnosis in smokers and never smokers, were strongest among blacks, and varied by histological type. After excluding the first five years of follow-up, hazard ratios per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI were 0.95 (95% CI = 0.90 to 1.00), 0.92 (95% CI = 0.89 to 0.95), and 0.89 (95% CI = 0.86 to 0.91) in never, former, and current smokers, and 0.86 (95% CI = 0.84 to 0.89), 0.94 (95% CI = 0.90 to 0.99), and 1.09 (95% CI = 1.03 to 1.15) for adenocarcinoma, squamous cell, and small cell carcinoma, respectively. Hazard ratios per 10 cm increase in WC were 1.09 (95% CI = 1.00 to 1.18), 1.12 (95% CI = 1.07 to 1.17), and 1.11 (95% CI = 1.07 to 1.16) in never, former, and current smokers, and 1.06 (95% CI = 1.01 to 1.12), 1.20 (95% CI = 1.12 to 1.29), and 1.13 (95% CI = 1.04 to 1.23) for adenocarcinoma, squamous cell, and small cell carcinoma, respectively. Participants with BMIs of less than 25 kg/m2 but high WC had a 40% higher risk (HR = 1.40, 95% CI = 1.26 to 1.56) than those with BMIs of 25 kg/m2 or greater but normal/moderate WC.

    CONCLUSIONS: The inverse BMI-lung cancer association is not entirely due to smoking and reverse causation. Central obesity, particularly concurrent with low BMI, may help identify high-risk populations for lung cancer.

Related Terms
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links