4.6 Article

Fetal Growth and Risk of Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Results From an Australian Case-Control Study

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 170, Issue 2, Pages 221-228

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwp117

Keywords

birth weight; case-control studies; child; fetal development; leukemia; precursor cell lymphoblastic leukemia-lymphoma

Funding

  1. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council [254539]
  2. NHMRC
  3. Cancer Council Western Australia Research Fellowship
  4. University of Sydney

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The relation between intrauterine growth and risk of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia was investigated in an Australian population-based case-control study that included 347 cases and 762 controls aged < 15 years recruited from 2003 to 2006. Information on proportion of optimal birth weight, a measure of the appropriateness of fetal growth, was collected from mothers by questionnaire. Data were analyzed by using logistic regression. Risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia was positively associated with proportion of optimal birth weight; the odds ratio for a 1-standard-deviation increase in proportion of optimal birth weight was 1.18 (95% confidence interval: 1.04, 1.35) after adjustment for the matching variables and potential confounders. This association was also present among children who did not have a high birth weight, suggesting that accelerated growth, rather than high birth weight per se, is associated with risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Similar associations between proportion of optimal birth weight and acute lymphoblastic leukemia were observed for both sexes and across age groups and leukemia subtypes. Results of this study confirm earlier findings of a positive association between rapidity of fetal growth and subsequent risk of acute lymphoblastic leukemia in childhood, and they are consistent with a role for insulin-like growth factors in the causal pathway.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available