4.6 Article

A prospective study of cigarette smoking and the incidence of diabetes mellitus among US male physicians

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
卷 109, 期 7, 页码 538-542

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9343(00)00568-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA40360] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK36798] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PURPOSE: To determine the association between cigarette smoking and the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We studied 21,068 US male physicians aged 40 to 84 years in the Physicians' Health Study who were initially free of diagnosed diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and cancer. Information about cigarette smoking and other risk indicators was obtained at baseline. The primary outcome was reported diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus. RESULTS: During 255,830 person-years of follow-up, 770 new cases of type 2 diabetes mellitus were identified. Smokers had a dose-dependent increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes mellitus: compared with never smokers, the age-adjusted relative risk was 2.1 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7 to 2.6) for current smokers of greater than or equal to 20 cigarettes per day, 1.4 (95% CT: 1.0 to 2.0) for current smokers of <20 cigarettes per day, and 1.2 (95% CI: 1.0 to 1.4) for past smokers. After multivariate adjustment for body mass index, physical activity, and other risk factors, the relative risks were 1.7 (95% CI: 1.3 to 2.3) for current smokers of 20 cigarettes per day, 1.5 (95% CI: 1.0 to 2.2) for current smokers of <20 cigarettes per day, and 1.1 (95% CI: 1.0 to 1.4) for past smokers. Total pack-years of cigarette smoking was also associated with the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (P for trend <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These prospective data support the hypothesis that cigarette smoking is an independent and modifiable determinant of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Med. 2000;109: 538-542. (C) 2000 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据