4.3 Article

Risk of lymphoma subtypes and dietary habits in a Mediterranean area

Journal

CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 39, Issue 6, Pages 1093-1098

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2015.09.001

Keywords

Diet; Mediterranean diet; Lymphoma, B-cell; Lymphoma, non Hodgkin; Case-control study

Funding

  1. Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC) [11855]
  2. Fondazione Banco di Sardegna
  3. Regione Autonoma della Sardegna [LR7CRP-59812/2012]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Previous studies have suggested that diet might affect risk of lymphoma subtypes. We investigated risk of lymphoma and its major subtypes associated with diet in the Mediterranean island of Sardinia, Italy. Methods: In 1998-2004, 322 incident lymphoma cases and 446 randomly selected population controls participated in a case-control study on lymphoma etiology in central-southern Sardinia. Questionnaire interviews included frequency of intake of 112 food items. Risk associated with individual dietary items and groups thereof was explored by unconditional and polytomous logistic regression analysis, adjusting by age, gender and education. Results: We observed an upward trend in risk of lymphoma (all subtypes combined) and B-cell lymphoma with frequency of intake of well done grilled/roasted chicken (p for trend = 0.01), and pizza (p for trend = 0.047), Neither adherence to Mediterranean diet nor a frequent intake of its individual components conveyed protection. We detected heterogeneity in risk associated with several food items and groups thereof by lymphoma subtypes although we could not rule out chance as responsible for the observed direct or inverse associations. Conclusions: Adherence to a Mediterranean diet does not seem to convey protection against the development of lymphoma. The association with specific food items might vary by lymphoma subtype. (C) 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available