4.4 Article

Metabolic Syndrome and Risks of Colon and Rectal Cancer: The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition Study

Journal

CANCER PREVENTION RESEARCH
Volume 4, Issue 11, Pages 1873-1883

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-11-0218

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. European Commission (DG-SANCO)
  2. International Agency for Research on Cancer
  3. Danish Cancer Society (Denmark)
  4. Ligue Contre le Cancer
  5. Institut Gustave Roussy
  6. Mutuelle Generale de l'Education Nationale
  7. Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche Medicale (INSERM
  8. France)
  9. Deutsche Krebshilfe
  10. Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
  11. Federal Ministry of Education and Research(Germany)
  12. Ministry of Health and Social Solidarity
  13. Stavros Niarchos Foundation
  14. Hellenic Health Foundation (Greece)
  15. Italian Association for Research on Cancer (AIRC)
  16. National Research Council (Italy)
  17. Dutch Ministry of Public Health, Welfare and Sports (VWS)
  18. Netherlands Cancer Registry (NKR)
  19. LK Research Funds
  20. Dutch Prevention Funds
  21. Dutch ZON (Zorg Onderzoek Nederland)
  22. World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF)
  23. Statistics Netherlands (the Netherlands)
  24. Nordforsk
  25. Nordic Centre of Excellence (Norway)
  26. Health Research Fund (FIS)
  27. Regional Governments of AndalucUa
  28. Asturias
  29. Basque Country
  30. Murcia and Navarra
  31. ISCIII RETIC (Spain) [RD06/0020]
  32. Swedish Cancer Society
  33. Swedish Scientific Council
  34. Regional Government of Skane and Vasterbotten (Sweden)
  35. Cancer Research UK
  36. Medical Research Council
  37. Stroke Association
  38. British Heart Foundation
  39. Department of Health, Food Standards Agency
  40. Wellcome Trust (United Kingdom)
  41. [ERC-2009-AdG 232997]
  42. Medical Research Council [G0401527, G0801056B, MC_U106179471, G1000143] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is purportedly related to risk of developing colorectal cancer; however, the association of MetS, as defined according to recent international criteria, and colorectal cancer has not been yet evaluated. In particular, it remains unclear to what extent the MetS components individually account for such an association. We addressed these issues in a nested case-control study that included 1,093 incident cases matched (1: 1) to controls by using incidence density sampling. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate relative risks (RR) and 95% CIs. MetS was defined according to the criteria of the National Cholesterol Education Program/Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP/ATPIII), the International Diabetes Federation (IDF), and the 2009 harmonized definition. Among individual components, abdominal obesity (RR = 1.51; 95% CI: 1.16-1.96) was associated with colon cancer, whereas abnormal glucose metabolism was associated with both colon (RR = 2.05; 95% CI: 1.57-2.68) and rectal cancer (RR = 2.07; 95% CI: 1.45-2.96). MetS, as defined by each of the definitions, was similarly associated with colon cancer (e. g., RR = 1.91; 95% CI: 1.47-2.42 for MetS by NCEP/ATPIII), whereas MetS by NCEP/ATPIII, but not IDF or harmonized definition, was associated with rectal cancer (RR = 1.45; 95% CI: 1.02-2.06). Overall, these associations were stronger in women than in men. However, the association between MetS and colorectal cancer was accounted for by abdominal obesity and abnormal glucose metabolism such that MetS did not provide risk information beyond these components (likelihood ratio test P = 0.10 for MetS by NCEP/ATPIII). These data suggest that simple assessment of abnormal glucose metabolism and/or abdominal obesity to identify individuals at colorectal cancer risk may have higher clinical utility than applying more complex MetS definitions. Cancer Prev Res; 4(11); 1873-83. (C) 2011 AACR.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available