4.7 Article

Synergistic interaction of benign prostatic hyperplasia and prostatitis on prostate cancer risk

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 108, Issue 9, Pages 1778-1783

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2013.184

Keywords

benign prostatic hyperplasia; prostatitis; diabetes; interaction; prostate cancer

Categories

Funding

  1. National Sciences Council [NSC 100-2621-M-039-001]
  2. China Medical University Hospital [1MS1]
  3. Taiwan Department of Health Clinical Trial and Research Centre for Excellence [DOH100-TD-B-111-004]
  4. Cancer Research Centre of Excellence [DOH100-TD-C-111-005]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The incidence of prostate cancer is much lower in Asian men than in Western men. This study investigated whether prostate cancer is associated with prostatitis, benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), and other medical conditions in the low-incidence population. Methods: From the claims data obtained from the universal National Health Insurance of Taiwan, we identified 1184 patients with prostate cancer diagnosed from 1997 to 2008. Controls comprised 4736 men randomly selected from a cancer-free population. Both groups were 50 years of age or above. Medical histories between the two groups were compared. Results: Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that prostatitis and BPH had stronger association with prostate cancer than the other medical conditions tested. Compared with men without prostatitis and BPH, a higher odds ratio (OR) for prostate cancer was associated with BPH (26.2, 95% confidence interval (CI) 20.8-33.0) than with prostatitis (10.5, 95% CI = 3.36-32.7). Men with both conditions had an OR of 49.2 (95% CI = 34.7-69.9). Conclusion: Men with prostate cancer have strong association with prostatitis and/or BPH. Prostatitis interacts with BPH, resulting in higher estimated relative risk of prostate cancer in men suffering from both conditions.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available