Table 2.
Adjusteda ORs and 95% CIs for the association between HNC and BMI
| BMI measures | Cases | Controls | Minimally-adjustedb |
Multivariate-adjustedc |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | n (%) | OR | (95% CI) | OR | (95% CI) | |
| BMI (kg/m2) at referenced,e | ||||||
| <18.5 | 918 (8.7) | 382 (2.5) | 2.57 | (2.20–2.99) | 2.13 | (1.75–2.58) |
| 18.5–24.9 | 5749 (54.6) | 6255 (41.5) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| 25.0–29.9 | 2855 (27.1) | 6069 (40.3) | 0.47 | (0.41–0.53) | 0.52 | (0.44–0.60) |
| ≥30.0 | 1011 (9.6) | 2359 (15.7) | 0.43 | (0.35–0.53) | 0.43 | (0.33–0.57) |
| P-value for study heterogeneity | <0.01 | <0.01 | ||||
| P for trendf | <10−6 | <10−6 | ||||
| BMI (kg/m2) at 2–5 years before referenceg | ||||||
| <18.5 | 481 (8.4) | 203 (3.6) | 1.88 | (1.06–3.33) | 1.56 | (0.80–3.02) |
| 18.5–24.9 | 3159 (55.4) | 2456 (43.0) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| 25.0–29.9 | 1523 (26.7) | 2072 (36.3) | 0.55 | (0.44–0.68) | 0.57 | (0.48–0.68) |
| ≥30.0 | 538 (9.4) | 980 (17.2) | 0.43 | (0.31–0.61) | 0.46 | (0.30–0.72) |
| P-value for study heterogeneity | <0.01 | <0.01 | ||||
| P-value for trendf | 0.000295 | 0.0011 | ||||
| BMI (kg/m2) between 20 and 30 years of ageh | ||||||
| <18.5 | 415 (6.3) | 579 (6.7) | 0.99 | (0.80–1.22) | 0.91 | (0.72–1.15) |
| 18.5–24.9 | 4708 (71.9) | 5911 (68.6) | 1.00 | 1.00 | ||
| 25.0–29.9 | 1232 (18.8) | 1748 (20.3) | 0.88 | (0.74–1.05) | 0.88 | (0.73–1.04) |
| ≥30.0 | 191 (2.9) | 375 (4.4) | 0.66 | (0.48–0.91) | 0.62 | (0.44–0.86) |
| P-value for study heterogeneity | <0.01 | 0.03 | ||||
| P-value for trendf | 0.13 | 0.11 | ||||
aINHANCE pooled case–control study of HNC.
bAdjusted for age, sex, study centres, race and education level.
cAdjusted for age, sex, race, education level, study centres, pack-year of cigarette smoking, lifetime duration of pipe use, lifetime duration of cigar use and alcohol drinks per day.
dDate of reference is defined as the date of diagnosis for cases and date of selection for controls.
eAggregate estimates are based on data from the following studies: France, Milan, Tampa, Puerto Rico, Switzerland, North Carolina, Aviano, Italy multicentre, Houston, Boston, New York, Los Angeles and South America.
fP-values for linear trend was calculated using the ordinal values for the categorical variable.
gAggregate estimates are based on data from the following studies: Central Europe, New York, Seattle, Boston, South America and IARC Multicentre.
hAggregate estimates are based on data from the following studies: Italy Multicentre, Centrale Europe, Los Angeles, Puerto Rico, South America and IARC Multicentre.