Skip to main content
. 2008 Aug 26;99(7):1170–1175. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604618

Table 1. Characteristics of studies included in systematic review of dietary glycaemic index, glycaemic load and risk of breast cancer.

                  Adjusted confounders
Authors (date), location Study Study design (mean follow-up) Cases Controls/cohort size Diet assessment Quality scale score Median GI (IQ range) Median GL (IQ range) Age BMI Energy Hormon. Reprod. Menstr. Smoking PA Education Alcohol Family BBD
Lajous et al (2008), France E3N Study Prospective cohort (9 years)a 1812 62 739 Self-reported 208-item FFQ 9/9 55 (44–66) 123 (84–165)  
Sieri et al (2007), Italy ORDET Study Prospective cohort (11.5 years) 289 8959 Self-reported 107-item FFQ 8/9 56 (52–59) 113 (97–151)      
McCann et al (2007), USA WEB Study Population-based case–control 1166 2105 Interviewed FFQ 7/9 77 (70–83)b 147 (104–186)b        
Giles et al (2006), Australia Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study Prospective cohort (9.1 years) 324 12 273 Self-reported 121-item FFQ 9/9 49 (46–53) 108 (77–150) # # #   # # # #  
Nielsen et al (2005), Denmark Diet, Cancer & Health Cohort Prospective cohort (6.6 years) 634 23 870 Self-reported 192-item FFQ 9/9            
Silvera et al (2005), Canada National Breast Screening Study Prospective cohort (16.6 years) 2518 49 111 Self-reported 86-item FFQ 9/9 77 (60–96) 104 (83–123)      
Lajous et al (2005), Mexico   Population-based case–control 475 1391 Interviewed FFQ 7/9 62 (—) 152 (44–214)            
Higginbotham et al (2004), USA Women's Health Study Prospective cohort (6.8 years) 946 38 446 Self-reported 131-item FFQ 9/9 53 (50–55) 117 (92–143)    
Holmes et al (2004), USA Nurses’ Health Study Prospective cohort (18 years) 4092 88 678 Multiple self-reported 61+ item FFQs 8/9 75 (69–81) 105 (81–130)        
Frazier et al (2004), USA Nurses’ Health Study II Retrospective cohort 361 47 355 Self-reported 131-item FFQ 8/9 79 (74–84) 170 (141–202)      
Cho et al (2003), USA Nurses’ Health Study II Prospective cohort (8 years)a 714 90 655 Self-reported 133-item FFQ 142-item FFQ 8/9 77 (70–82) 120 (97–148)    
Jonas et al (2003), USA CPS II Nutrition Cohort Prospective cohort (5 years) 1442 63 307 Self-reported 68-item FFQ 8/9 74 (65–85) 81 (58–103)
Levi et al (2002), Switzerland   Hospital-based case–control 331 534 Interviewed 79-item FFQ 6/9 92 (73–112)        
Augustin et al (2001), Italy   Hospital-based case–control 2569 2588 Interviewed 78-item FFQ 6/9 74 (70–79) 132 (98–174)        

CPS=Cancer Prevention Study; E3N=French component of European Prospective Investigation into Diet and Cancer Study; ORDET=Hormones and Diet in Etiology of Breast Tumors Study; WEB=Western New York Exposure and Breast Cancer Study.

a

Total follow-up length, mean not reported.

b

Postmenopausal GI/GL data; majority of study participants (60–70%) are postmenopausal.

Adjusted confounders: age; BMI=body mass index or body weight; energy=energy intake; hormon.=hormone replacement therapy/oral contraceptive use; reprod.=reproductive factors (e.g., parity, age at first birth); menstr.=menstrual history (e.g., age at menarche or menopause, menopausal status); smoking; PA=physical activity; education; alcohol=alcohol intake; family=family history of breast cancer; BBD=history of benign breast disease. # confounder tested but not included in final model.