Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the association of body size and fat distribution with risk of colorectal cancer (CRC) in Chinese men and women.
DESIGN
Population-based, prospective cohort study.
SUBJECTS
The analysis included 134 255 Chinese adults enrolled in the Shanghai Women’s Health Study and the Shanghai Men’s Health Study, with an average follow-up of 11.0 and 5.5 years, respectively.
MEASUREMENTS
Waist circumference (WC), body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) were measured by trained interviewers at baseline. Multivariable Cox models were used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for incident CRC.
RESULTS
A total of 935 incident CRC cases were identified. Both measures of general adiposity (measured by BMI) and central adiposity (measured by WHR and WC) were significantly associated with increased risk of colon cancer in men but not in women. Multivariable adjusted HRs for colon cancer in men in the highest compared with the lowest quintiles were 2.15 (95% CI: 1.35-3.43; P for trend = 0.0006) for BMI, 1.97 (95% CI: 1.19-3.24; P for trend = 0.0004) for WHR and 2.00 (95% CI: 1.21-3.29; P for trend = 0.0002) for WC. The BMI-associated risk was attenuated in analyses stratified by WHR, while the WHR-associated risk remained significant in the high BMI stratum (HR for comparison of extreme tertiles of WHR: 3.38, 95% CI: 1.47-7.75; P for trend =0.0002). None of these anthropometric measures were significantly associated with rectal cancer.
CONCLUSION
Obesity, particularly central obesity, was associated with increased risk of colon cancer in men.
Keywords: Obesity, colorectal cancer, cohort study
INTRODUCTION
In 2008, it was estimated that about 1.24 million people were diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) worldwide, accounting for 9.8% of all cancer incidence.(1) In urban Shanghai, China, the incidence rate of colon cancer over the past 3 decades has doubled in both men and women, while the increase in rectal cancer incidence has been much smaller (approximately 9%).(2, 3) Accompanying the rise of colon cancer is a parallel increase in the prevalence of obesity in this population.(4)
The International Agency for Research into Cancer has recently classified CRC as an obesity-related cancer (5) and the World Cancer Research Fund also considers evidence for greater body fatness as a cause of CRC to be convincing.(6) However, several recent systematic reviews and meta-analyses have shown significant heterogeneity in the body fatness and CRC association by sex. The association for men is generally stronger and more consistent than that for women.(7-11) The mechanisms underlying this sex difference, although not well understood, are thought to be related to sex steroid hormone exposures.(12) Moreover, although both general and central obesity have been associated with CRC risk, measures of central adiposity such as waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) and waist circumference (WC), have been shown to be better predictors of CRC risk in prospective cohort studies.(13-17) Most previous studies were conducted in Western societies, where overweight and obesity is highly prevalent,(16, 18-22) and were based on self-reported anthropometric measurements. Data from relatively lean populations and, more importantly, from studies with directly measured anthropometric variables are clearly needed to further our understanding of the association between obesity and CRC risk.
In the present analysis, we evaluated the association between measures of general and central adiposity and CRC risk in two large prospective cohorts - the Shanghai Women’s Health Study (SWHS) and the Shanghai Men’s Health Study (SMHS), both conducted in relatively lean Chinese populations with anthropometric measurements administered by trained interviewers at baseline.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Study population
The SWHS and the SMHS are both population-based, prospective cohort studies conducted in urban Shanghai, China. Previous publications have described the designs and methods in detail for the SWHS (23) and the SMHS.(24) Briefly, the SWHS recruited 74 941 women aged 40-70 years from 1997 to 2000, with a participation rate of 92.33%.(23) The SMHS recruited 61 491 men aged 40-74 years from 2002 to 2006, with a participation rate of 73.99%.(24) For both cohorts, trained interviewers administered in-person interviews at baseline, using a structured questionnaire, to collect information on demographic characteristics, diet, physical activity, personal habits, family cancer history, reproductive history and hormone use (for the SWHS only) and other characteristics. Both studies were approved by the Institutional Review Boards of the Shanghai Cancer Institute and Vanderbilt University, and all participants provided written informed consent before the in-person interview.
Anthropometry
Anthropometric measurements, including weight, circumferences of waist and hips and standing and sitting heights, were taken at baseline by trained interviewers who were retired medical professionals.(25) Each participant wore light clothing during the measurement. All measurements were taken twice with tolerance limits of 1 kg for weight measurement and 1 cm for measurements of height and circumferences of the waist and hips. If the measurements were greater than the tolerance limits, a third measurement was taken. The average of the two closest measurements was used in the analysis. Body mass index (BMI) was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters.
In the SWHS, information on self-reported weight and height at age 20 years for all participants and weight at age 50 years for women aged over 50 years at baseline were collected; in the SMHS, self-reported weight at age 20 and 40 years were obtained. In the present study, weight change was defined as the difference between weight at baseline and the recalled weight at age 20. BMI at age 20 was calculated using recalled weight and recalled height. BMI at age 50 for women and at age 40 for men were calculated using recalled weight and measured height at baseline.
Case identification
Incident CRC cases were identified through a combination of annual record linkage with the Shanghai Cancer Registry and the Shanghai Vital Statistics databases and active follow-up surveys conducted every 2-3 years. For the SWHS, the in-person follow-up rates were 99.8% for the first (2000–2002), 98.7% for the second (2002–2004), 96.7% for the third (2004–2007) and 92.0% for the fourth (2007-2011) surveys. For the SMHS, the in-person follow-up response rates were 97.6% for the first (2004–2008) and 93.6% for the second (2008-2011) surveys. For the incident cancer cases identified through record linkages, all possible matches were verified by home visits. Medical charts from the diagnostic hospital were reviewed for diagnosis confirmation. The present study included all incident CRC cases diagnosed between the date of baseline enrollment and December 31, 2009.
Statistical analysis
For the present analyses, we excluded individuals with a prior history of cancer (SWHS, n=1 579; SMHS, n=0, as having a history of cancer was part of the exclusion criteria for participation in the SMHS); self-reported cases whose diagnosis of cancer could not be confirmed (SWHS, n=265, including 12 CRC cases; SMHS, n=174, including 7 CRC cases) and individuals who reported implausible total energy intake (<500 or >3 500 kcal/d in the SWHS [n=125]; <500 or >4 500 kcal/d in the SMHS [n=34]). The resulting cohort populations used in this analysis consist of 72 972 women and 61 283 men (134 255 adults).
A Cox regression model was used, with age as the time scale, to compute hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of developing CRC associated with anthropometric measurements and to adjust for potential confounders. Entry time was defined as age at enrollment and exit time was defined as age at CRC diagnosis or censoring (either December 31, 2009 or date of death), whichever came first. All anthropometric measurements were categorized into quintiles based on distributions of these measurements in each entire cohort, with the lowest quintile serving as the reference, and also analyzed as continuous variables to evaluate linear trends.
Potential confounding variables chosen based on a priori considerations (26) included age at baseline (continuous), education (4 categories: elementary school or less, junior high, high school and professional education or above), income (3 categories: low, middle and high), cigarette use (yes or no, for the SWHS only), pack-years of cigarette use (continuous, for the SMHS only), tea consumption (yes or no), alcohol consumption (yes or no), physical activity (measured by metabolic equivalent task hours per week per year, continuous), family history of CRC (yes or no), menopausal status (yes or no, for the SWHS only) and intakes (continuous) of total energy, red meat, fruits and vegetables. Associations of colon and rectal cancers with most of these covariates, such as age, education, household income, family history of CRC, tea consumption, cigarette smoking, intake of fruits and vegetables, were statistically significant or of borderline significance in this study (data not shown). Since diabetes is likely an intermediate condition in the causal pathway between obesity and colon cancer, we did not include this variable in the primary model. To address the potential influence of pre-diagnosed disease on the risk estimates, we conducted sensitivity analyses by excluding the first year of observation and CRC cases diagnosed during the same time period. All analyses were conducted using SAS, version 9.2, software (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina). All statistical tests were based on two-sided probability.
RESULTS
The mean age (s.d.) at baseline was 52.5 years (9.1) in the SWHS and 55.4 (9.7) in the SMHS. For women, the means for BMI and WHR were 24.0 (3.4) and 0.81 (0.05), respectively; for men, the means for BMI and WHR were 23.7 (3.1) and 0.90 (0.06), respectively. Baseline characteristics of these two study populations according to quintiles of BMI and WHR are presented in Table 1. In general, both women and men with a higher BMI or WHR were older and were more likely to have a prior history of diabetes and higher intake of total energy. Cigarette use was associated with lower BMI for men but higher WHR for both men and women. Women with a higher BMI or WHR were also more likely to participate in exercise; in contrast, their male counterparts were less likely to engage in exercise.
Table 1. Baseline characteristics by BMI and WHR quintile in SWHS and SMHS1.
| Variable | Quintile category2 |
P | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Q5 | |||
| BMI | |||||||
| N | Women | 14 429 | 14 568 | 14 650 | 14 685 | 14 617 | |
| Men | 12 221 | 12 272 | 12 243 | 12 213 | 12 299 | ||
| Age (years)3 | Women | 50.1±8.7 | 50.7±8.6 | 52.0±8.8 | 53.8±8.9 | 56.0±8.9 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 54.3±9.9 | 54.9±9.7 | 55.5±9.6 | 55.7±9.6 | 56.4±9.7 | <0.0001 | |
| Total energy intake (kcal day−1) 4 |
Women | 1 631.3±3.3 | 1 656.3±3.3 | 1 673.1±3.2 | 1 689.0±3.2 | 1 718.9±3.3 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 1 828.2±4.3 | 1 887.6±4.3 | 1 918.5±4.3 | 1 938.5±4.3 | 1 969.8±4.3 | <0.0001 | |
| Physical activity 4,5 | Women | 103.7±0.4 | 105.2±0.4 | 107.1±0.4 | 107.9±0.4 | 108.8±0.4 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 60.0±0.3 | 60.4±0.3 | 60.0±0.3 | 59.6±0.3 | 58.2±0.3 | <0.0001 | |
| Education, high school and above (%) |
Women | 48.6 | 46.8 | 42.9 | 38.5 | 30.5 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 58.2 | 60.6 | 61.9 | 60.5 | 57.8 | 0.08 | |
| Ever smoke (%) | Women | 3.5 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 2.6 | 3.3 | 0.8 |
| Men | 75.1 | 69.3 | 67.9 | 66.7 | 69.1 | <0.0001 | |
| Ever drink (%) | Women | 2.2 | 2.4 | 2.3 | 2.4 | 2.1 | 0.7 |
| Men | 34.7 | 34.0 | 33.4 | 33.3 | 32.8 | 0.0004 | |
| Diabetes (%) | Women | 3.3 | 3.8 | 4.0 | 4.6 | 5.9 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 4.3 | 6.3 | 6.8 | 6.3 | 7.5 | <0.0001 | |
| Family history of colorectal cancer (%) |
Women | 2.5 | 2.4 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.0 | 0.001 |
| Men | 1.9 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.0 | 0.2 | |
| WHR | |||||||
| N | Women | 13 754 | 10 358 | 16 420 | 14 668 | 17 751 | |
| Men | 9 918 | 13 395 | 9 556 | 15 672 | 12 676 | ||
| Age (years) 3 | Women | 49.3±8.0 | 50.2±8.3 | 51.6±8.6 | 53.2±9.0 | 56.6±9.1 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 54.6±9.8 | 55.0±9.7 | 55.0±9.6 | 55.2±9.6 | 56.8±9.9 | <0.0001 | |
| Total energy intake (kcal day−1) 4 |
Women | 1 661.0±3.4 | 1 662.9±3.9 | 1 669.4±3.1 | 1 680.2±3.2 | 1 689.0±3.0 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 1 879.6±4.8 | 1 905.1±4.1 | 1 918.6±4.9 | 1 919.4±3.8 | 1 914.0±4.3 | <0.0001 | |
| Physical activity 4,5 | Women | 106.2±0.4 | 104.7±0.4 | 106.6±0.4 | 107.5±0.4 | 107.2±0.4 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 62.1±0.3 | 60.9±0.3 | 60.2±0.3 | 59.4±0.3 | 56.4±0.3 | <0.0001 | |
| Education, high school and above (%) |
Women | 48.9 | 46.7 | 43.3 | 39.2 | 32.8 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 58.2 | 60.9 | 61.2 | 60.3 | 58.1 | 0.3 | |
| Ever smoke (%) | Women | 2.8 | 2.4 | 2.4 | 2.5 | 3.4 | 0.0001 |
| Men | 69.4 | 67.9 | 68.1 | 69.4 | 73.1 | <0.0001 | |
| Ever drink (%) | Women | 2.1 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 2.4 | 2.3 | 0.02 |
| Men | 30.1 | 32.0 | 33.3 | 35.0 | 37.2 | <0.0001 | |
| Diabetes (%) | Women | 1.8 | 2.6 | 3.4 | 4.3 | 7.2 | <0.0001 |
| Men | 3.6 | 5.2 | 6.2 | 6.6 | 9.6 | <0.0001 | |
| Family history of colorectal cancer (%) |
Women | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.3 | 2.2 | 1.0 |
| Men | 2.1 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 2.2 | 0.4 | |
All variables (except age) were standardized to the age distribution at baseline. The general linear model for continuous variables and Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel statistics for categorical variables were used.
Quintile cutoffs for BMI: 21.10, 22.88, 24.55 and 26.70 in the SWHS; 21.13, 22.93, 24.43, and 26.19 in the SMHS. Quintile cutoffs for WHR: 0.77, 0.78, 0.81, and 0.84 in the SWHS; 0.85, 0.88, 0.90, and 0.94 in the SMHS.
Values are mean±s.d.
Values are mean±s.e.
Measured by metabolic equivalent task hours per week per year (MET-h.wk−1.y−1).
A total of 935 incident CRC cases were identified. In the SWHS, 622 incident CRC cases were identified during an average follow-up of 11.0 years, including 382 cases of colon cancer and 240 cases of rectal cancer. In the SMHS, 313 incident CRC cases were identified during an average follow-up of 5.5 years, including 180 cases of colon cancer and 133 cases of rectal cancer. Overall, among women, neither BMI nor WHR were associated with risk of colon cancer, rectal cancer or both cancers combined (Table 2). Compared with women in the lowest quintile of BMI at baseline, women in the highest quintile had a multivariable HR for CRC of 1.08 (95% CI: 0.82-1.43; P for trend=0.75). For WHR, the corresponding HR was 1.01 (95% CI: 0.79-1.31; P for trend=0.65). Similar results were also observed for other anthropometric measurements, including BMI at age 20, BMI at age 50, baseline waist circumference and weight gain since age 20 and when BMI at baseline was categorized according to WHO criteria.
Table 2. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of colorectal cancer associated with anthropometric measurements in women, the Shanghai Women’s Health Study (1997 – 2009)1.
| Person years | Colorectal cancer |
Colon cancer |
Rectal cancer |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of cases |
HR2 | 95% CI | No. of cases |
HR2 | 95% CI | No. of cases |
HR2 | 95% CI | ||
| BMI at baseline, kg/m2, n=72 949 | ||||||||||
| <21.10 | 159 042 | 85 | 1.00 | 52 | 1.00 | 33 | 1.00 | |||
| 21.10-22.88 | 161 165 | 116 | 1.27 | 0.96-1.68 | 63 | 1.10 | 0.76-1.58 | 53 | 1.55 | 1.00-2.39 |
| 22.89-24.55 | 161 608 | 129 | 1.27 | 0.97-1.68 | 88 | 1.36 | 0.96-1.92 | 41 | 1.11 | 0.70-1.76 |
| 24.56-26.70 | 161 146 | 150 | 1.31 | 1.00-1.72 | 92 | 1.23 | 0.87-1.74 | 58 | 1.44 | 0.93-2.23 |
| ≥26.71 | 158 939 | 141 | 1.08 | 0.82-1.43 | 86 | 1.00 | 0.70-1.43 | 55 | 1.22 | 0.78-1.90 |
| P for trend | 0.75 | 0.97 | 0.64 | |||||||
| BMI at baseline, kg/m2, n=72 949 | ||||||||||
| <25 | 520 838 | 362 | 1.00 | 222 | 1.00 | 140 | 1.00 | |||
| 25-29.99 | 240 835 | 222 | 1.02 | 0.86-1.21 | 138 | 0.99 | 0.79-1.23 | 84 | 1.07 | 0.81-1.41 |
| ≥30 | 40 226 | 37 | 0.89 | 0.63-1.25 | 21 | 0.78 | 0.50-1.23 | 16 | 1.07 | 0.63-1.81 |
| P for trend | 0.73 | 0.43 | 0.66 | |||||||
| BMI at age 20, kg/m2, n=62 236 | ||||||||||
| <17.54 | 137 763 | 83 | 1.00 | 50 | 1.00 | 33 | 1.00 | |||
| 17.54-18.72 | 134 841 | 89 | 1.03 | 0.77-1.39 | 53 | 1.01 | 0.69-1.49 | 36 | 1.06 | 0.66-1.71 |
| 18.73-19.99 | 141 323 | 109 | 1.17 | 0.88-1.55 | 69 | 1.21 | 0.84-1.74 | 40 | 1.10 | 0.69-1.74 |
| 20.00-21.62 | 136 215 | 94 | 0.99 | 0.73-1.33 | 62 | 1.06 | 0.73-1.55 | 32 | 0.87 | 0.53-1.42 |
| ≥21.63 | 138 789 | 107 | 1.08 | 0.81-1.44 | 64 | 1.06 | 0.73-1.54 | 43 | 1.11 | 0.70-1.75 |
| P for trend | 0.77 | 0.75 | 0.96 | |||||||
| BMI at age 50, kg/m2, n=33 169 | ||||||||||
| <20.70 | 72 814 | 76 | 1.00 | 49 | 1.00 | 27 | 1.00 | |||
| 20.70-22.45 | 72 561 | 96 | 1.29 | 0.95-1.74 | 60 | 1.24 | 0.85-1.82 | 36 | 1.37 | 0.83-2.25 |
| 22.46-24.11 | 72 553 | 76 | 1.04 | 0.75-1.43 | 50 | 1.06 | 0.71-1.57 | 26 | 1.00 | 0.58-1.72 |
| 24.12-26.21 | 72 263 | 99 | 1.33 | 0.99-1.80 | 67 | 1.40 | 0.96-2.02 | 32 | 1.22 | 0.73-2.04 |
| ≥26.22 | 71 175 | 89 | 1.19 | 0.87-1.63 | 56 | 1.18 | 0.80-1.74 | 33 | 1.2 | 0.72-2.03 |
| P for trend | 0.29 | 0.31 | 0.70 | |||||||
| WHR, n=72 951 | ||||||||||
| <0.77 | 152 133 | 92 | 1.00 | 53 | 1.00 | 39 | 1.00 | |||
| 0.77-0.78 | 114 519 | 60 | 0.81 | 0.58-1.12 | 37 | 0.85 | 0.85-1.29 | 23 | 0.75 | 0.45-1.26 |
| 0.79-0.81 | 181 223 | 144 | 1.08 | 0.83-1.40 | 92 | 1.15 | 0.82-1.61 | 52 | 0.98 | 0.65-1.49 |
| 0.82-0.84 | 161 491 | 126 | 0.95 | 0.73-1.25 | 81 | 1.00 | 0.70-1.41 | 45 | 0.88 | 0.57-1.36 |
| ≥0.85 | 192 549 | 199 | 1.01 | 0.79-1.31 | 118 | 0.96 | 0.69-1.34 | 81 | 1.11 | 0.74-1.66 |
| P for trend | 0.65 | 0.92 | 0.40 | |||||||
| WC, cm, n=72 962 | ||||||||||
| <70 | 131 037 | 60 | 1.00 | 33 | 1.00 | 27 | 1.00 | |||
| 70-74 | 177 641 | 108 | 1.21 | 0.89-1.66 | 64 | 1.27 | 0.83-1.95 | 44 | 1.13 | 0.70-1.82 |
| 75-79 | 171 313 | 148 | 1.46 | 1.08-1.98 | 91 | 1.55 | 1.03-2.32 | 57 | 1.36 | 0.86-2.17 |
| 80-84 | 153 372 | 124 | 1.15 | 0.84-1.58 | 78 | 1.21 | 0.80-1.84 | 46 | 1.07 | 0.66-1.75 |
| ≥85 | 168 677 | 182 | 1.26 | 0.93-1.72 | 116 | 1.34 | 0.89-2.00 | 66 | 1.17 | 0.73-1.88 |
| P for trend | 0.43 | 0.46 | 0.73 | |||||||
| Weight gain since age 20, kg, n=65 440 | ||||||||||
| <2.5 | 140 530 | 90 | 1.00 | 58 | 1.00 | 32 | 1.00 | |||
| 2.5-7.9 | 146 339 | 113 | 1.31 | 0.99-1.73 | 67 | 1.21 | 0.85-1.72 | 46 | 1.50 | 0.95-2.36 |
| 8.0-11.9 | 136116 | 84 | 1.06 | 0.78-1.43 | 57 | 1.11 | 0.77-1.60 | 27 | 0.96 | 0.58-1.61 |
| 12.0-16.9 | 143 611 | 114 | 1.31 | 0.99-1.73 | 71 | 1.25 | 0.88-1.77 | 43 | 1.43 | 0.90-2.26 |
| ≥17.0 | 156 350 | 123 | 1.16 | 0.88-1.53 | 68 | 0.96 | 0.67-1.37 | 55 | 1.54 | 0.99-2.39 |
| P for trend | 0.39 | 0.83 | 0.11 | |||||||
All anthropometric measurements were categorized into quintiles, except for BMI at baseline, for which categories were defined by both quintile cutoffs and WHO criteria.
Multivariable HRs were adjusted for age at baseline, education, income, cigarette use, alcohol consumption, tea consumption, physical activity, family history of colorectal cancer, menopausal status and intakes of total energy, red meat, fruits and vegetables.
However, among men, positive associations between obesity-related measurements and risk of colon cancer were observed (Table 3). Multivariable HRs for the comparison of extreme quintiles were 2.15 (95% CI: 1.35-3.43), 1.97 (95% CI: 1.19 - 3.24) and 2.00 (95% CI: 1.21 - 3.29), respectively, for BMI, WHR and WC. Tests for linear trend were highly significant (P for trend<0.001 for all). Similar results were observed when BMI at baseline was categorized according to WHO criteria. A positive association was also found for BMI at age 40 (corresponding HR = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.24-3.24, P for trend = 0.0005). The multivariable HR for per s.d. increase (3.1 kg/m2) in BMI was 1.30 (95% CI: 1.12-1.50, P = 0.004); the HR for per s.d. increase (0.06) in WHR was 1.33 (95% CI: 1.15-1.54, P =0.0002); and the HR for per s.d. increase (8.7 cm) in WC was 1.32 (95% CI: 1.14-1.52, P =0.0002) (data not shown in tables). The sex-differences in BMI- and WHR-associated risk estimates for colon cancer were statistically significant (P for heterogeneity = 0.04 and 0.006, respectively, derived from the fully adjusted model with a multiplicative interaction term of gender and obesity) and of borderline significance for WC (P for heterogeneity = 0.07). In contrast, none of the anthropometric measurements studied were statistically associated with risk of rectal cancer in men, although the P for heterogeneity in BMI-, WHR-, and WC-associated risk of colon versus rectal cancer were statistically insignificant.
Table 3. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of colorectal cancer associated with anthropometric measurements in men, the Shanghai Men’s Health Study (2002-2009)1.
| Person years |
Colorectal cancer |
Colon cancer |
Rectal cancer |
|||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| No. of cases |
HR2 | 95%CI | No. of cases |
HR2 | 95% CI | No. of cases |
HR2 | 95% CI | ||
| BMI at baseline, kg/m2, n=61 248 | ||||||||||
| <21.13 | 66 812 | 47 | 1.00 | 25 | 1.00 | 22 | 1.00 | |||
| 21.14-22.93 | 67 482 | 58 | 1.18 | 0.80-1.73 | 30 | 1.14 | 0.67-1.94 | 28 | 1.22 | 0.70-2.14 |
| 22.94-24.43 | 67 328 | 54 | 1.06 | 0.72-1.58 | 29 | 1.06 | 0.62-1.82 | 25 | 1.07 | 0.60-1.90 |
| 24.44-26.19 | 67 168 | 61 | 1.20 | 0.82-1.76 | 33 | 1.21 | 0.72-2.04 | 28 | 1.18 | 0.67-2.07 |
| ≥26.20 | 67 040 | 93 | 1.71 | 1.20-2.44 | 63 | 2.15 | 1.35-3.43 | 30 | 1.20 | 0.69-2.10 |
| P for trend | 0.003 | 0.0006 | 0.61 | |||||||
| BMI at baseline, kg/m2, n=61 248 | ||||||||||
| <25 | 224 834 | 185 | 1.00 | 96 | 1.00 | 89 | 1.00 | |||
| 25-29.99 | 102 540 | 114 | 1.25 | 0.99-1.58 | 77 | 1.61 | 1.19-2.18 | 37 | 0.85 | 0.57-1.24 |
| ≥30 | 8 457 | 14 | 1.74 | 1.01-3.01 | 7 | 1.66 | 0.77-3.59 | 7 | 1.84 | 0.85-3.99 |
| P for trend | 0.014 | 0.0021 | 0.88 | |||||||
| BMI at age 20, kg/m2, n=52 894 | ||||||||||
| <17.93 | 57 266 | 41 | 1.00 | 21 | 1.00 | 20 | 1.00 | |||
| 17.93-19.02 | 59 105 | 41 | 0.96 | 0.62-1.48 | 25 | 1.14 | 0.64-2.04 | 16 | 0.77 | 0.40-1.49 |
| 19.03-19.89 | 57 163 | 47 | 1.08 | 0.71-1.64 | 23 | 1.02 | 0.57-1.85 | 24 | 1.14 | 0.63-2.06 |
| 19.90-21.00 | 57 129 | 55 | 1.19 | 0.79-1.79 | 35 | 1.46 | 0.85-2.51 | 20 | 0.91 | 0.49-1.69 |
| ≥21.01 | 60 376 | 65 | 1.21 | 0.81-1.79 | 39 | 1.38 | 0.81-2.36 | 26 | 1.02 | 0.57-1.84 |
| P for trend | 0.19 | 0.14 | 0.78 | |||||||
| BMI at age 40, kg/m2, n=57 130 | ||||||||||
| <20.05 | 63 206 | 53 | 1.00 | 28 | 1.00 | 25 | 1.00 | |||
| 20.05-21.46 | 61 390 | 47 | 0.93 | 0.62-1.37 | 25 | 0.94 | 0.55-1.61 | 22 | 0.91 | 0.51-1.62 |
| 21.47-22.81 | 63 685 | 45 | 0.88 | 0.59-1.30 | 26 | 0.96 | 0.56-1.64 | 19 | 0.78 | 0.43-1.41 |
| 22.82-24.50 | 63 542 | 63 | 1.32 | 0.91-1.91 | 38 | 1.53 | 0.94-2.50 | 25 | 1.09 | 0.62-1.90 |
| ≥24.51 | 62 559 | 69 | 1.61 | 1.12-2.31 | 44 | 2.01 | 1.24-3.24 | 25 | 1.18 | 0.67-2.07 |
| P for trend | 0.002 | 0.0005 | 0.45 | |||||||
| WHR, n=61 217 | ||||||||||
| <0.85 | 55 577 | 38 | 1.00 | 21 | 1.00 | 17 | 1.00 | |||
| 0.85-0.88 | 74 530 | 52 | 1.00 | 0.66-1.52 | 27 | 0.94 | 0.53-1.67 | 25 | 1.07 | 0.58-1.98 |
| 0.89-0.90 | 51 955 | 41 | 1.14 | 0.74-1.78 | 23 | 1.17 | 0.65-2.12 | 18 | 1.11 | 0.57-2.15 |
| 0.91-0.94 | 85 306 | 91 | 1.51 | 1.03-2.21 | 49 | 1.49 | 0.89-2.49 | 42 | 1.53 | 0.87-2.70 |
| ≥0.95 | 68 301 | 91 | 1.65 | 1.12-2.41 | 60 | 1.97 | 1.19-3.24 | 31 | 1.24 | 0.69-2.26 |
| P for trend | 0.0004 | 0.0004 | 0.20 | |||||||
| WC, cm, n=61 240 | ||||||||||
| <78 | 65 104 | 47 | 1.00 | 21 | 1.00 | 26 | 1.00 | |||
| 78-82 | 61 822 | 38 | 0.82 | 0.53-1.26 | 19 | 0.91 | 0.49-1.70 | 19 | 0.74 | 0.41-1.34 |
| 83-86 | 65 073 | 53 | 1.04 | 0.70-1.54 | 30 | 1.31 | 0.75-2.30 | 23 | 0.82 | 0.47-1.44 |
| 87-91 | 70 828 | 80 | 1.38 | 0.96-1.98 | 48 | 1.84 | 1.10-3.08 | 32 | 1.01 | 0.60-1.70 |
| ≥92 | 72 966 | 95 | 1.38 | 0.97-1.97 | 62 | 2.00 | 1.21-3.29 | 33 | 0.88 | 0.52-1.49 |
| P for trend | 0.004 | 0.0002 | 0.95 | |||||||
| Weight gain since age 20, kg, n=54 049 | ||||||||||
| <3.7 | 58 773 | 55 | 1.00 | 28 | 1.00 | 27 | 1.00 | |||
| 3.7-9.4 | 59 616 | 43 | 0.83 | 0.56-1.24 | 24 | 0.92 | 0.53-1.59 | 19 | 0.75 | 0.41-1.34 |
| 9.5-13.9 | 56 205 | 45 | 0.99 | 0.67-1.470 | 22 | 0.96 | 0.55-1.68 | 23 | 1.02 | 0.58-1.78 |
| 14.0-19.4 | 61 868 | 54 | 1.11 | 0.76-1.62 | 36 | 1.48 | 0.90-2.43 | 18 | 0.73 | 0.40-1.34 |
| ≥19.5 | 60 936 | 62 | 1.33 | 0.92-1.92 | 37 | 1.60 | 0.97-2.64 | 25 | 1.06 | 0.61-1.83 |
| P for trend | 0.05 | 0.01 | 0.90 | |||||||
All anthropometric measurements were categorized into quintiles, except for BMI at baseline, for which categories were defined by both quintile cutoffs and WHO criteria.
Multivariable HRs were adjusted for age at baseline, education, income, pack-years of cigarette use, tea consumption, alcohol consumption, physical activity, family history of colorectal cancer and intakes of total energy, red meat, fruits and vegetables.
BMI and WHR were moderately correlated (Pearson r = 0.57). Further analysis showed that the BMI-associated risk in men was attenuated in analyses stratified by WHR, whereas the positive association between WHR and colon cancer risk remained significant for the high BMI stratum (HR for comparison of extreme tertiles of WHR: 3.38, 95% CI: 1.47-7.75; P for trend =0.0002) (Table 4).
Table 4. Stratified analysis of BMI, WHR and colorectal cancer risk, the Shanghai Men’s Health Study (2002-2009).
| Colorectal cancer |
Colon Cancer |
Rectal Cancer |
||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Person years |
No. of cases |
HR1 | 95%CI | No. of cases |
HR1 | 95%CI | No. of cases |
HR1 | 95%CI | |
| WHR≤0.90 (median), n=32 908 | ||||||||||
| BMI Tertile12 | 89 162 | 65 | 1.00 | 33 | 1.00 | 32 | 1.00 | |||
| Tertile 2 | 60 134 | 41 | 0.9 | 0.60-1.34 | 20 | 0.85 | 0.48-1.51 | 21 | 0.95 | 0.54-1.65 |
| Tertile 3 | 32 963 | 25 | 0.89 | 0.55-1.44 | 18 | 1.34 | 0.74-2.44 | 7 | 0.45 | 0.19-1.09 |
| P for trend | 0.57 | 0.47 | 0.11 | |||||||
| WHR>0.90, n=28 340 | ||||||||||
| BMI Tertile12 | 22 555 | 21 | 1.00 | 11 | 1.00 | 10 | 1.00 | |||
| Tertile 2 | 52 043 | 54 | 1.07 | 0.64-1.77 | 30 | 1.09 | 0.55-2.19 | 24 | 1.03 | 0.49-2.16 |
| Tertile 3 | 78 974 | 107 | 1.33 | 0.83-2.14 | 68 | 1.57 | 0.83-2.99 | 39 | 1.04 | 0.52-2.11 |
| P for trend | 0.13 | 0.07 | 0.9 | |||||||
| BMI≤23.67 (median), n=30 713 | ||||||||||
| WHR Tertile12 | 82 733 | 60 | 1.00 | 32 | 1.00 | 28 | 1.00 | |||
| Tertile 2 | 50 871 | 37 | 0.94 | 0.62-1.42 | 22 | 1.02 | 0.58-1.78 | 15 | 0.86 | 0.46-1.61 |
| Tertile 3 | 34 828 | 33 | 1.13 | 0.74-1.73 | 16 | 1.03 | 0.57-1.89 | 17 | 1.24 | 0.68-2.28 |
| P for trend | 0.66 | 0.92 | 0.58 | |||||||
| BMI>23.67, n=30 504 | ||||||||||
| WHR Tertile12 | 23 668 | 12 | 1.00 | 6 | 1.00 | 6 | 1.00 | |||
| Tertile 2 | 49 744 | 43 | 1.62 | 0.85-3.09 | 23 | 1.69 | 0.68-4.21 | 20 | 1.53 | 0.61-3.83 |
| Tertile 3 | 93 825 | 128 | 2.59 | 1.43-4.69 | 81 | 3.38 | 1.47-7.75 | 47 | 1.81 | 0.77-4.26 |
| P for trend | 0.0001 | 0.0002 | 0.16 | |||||||
Multivariable HRs were adjusted for age at baseline, education, income, pack-years of cigarette use, tea consumption, alcohol consumption, physical activity, family history of colorectal cancer and intakes of total energy, red meat, fruits and vegetables.
Tertile cutoffs for BMI: 22.41 and 24.98; and tertile cutoffs for WHR: 0.88 and 0.92.
We found no evidence that associations of BMI, WHR or WC and CRC risk varied significantly by age at baseline or age at menopause (for the SWHS only), nor did the associations significantly differ by lifestyle factors such as physical activity or intake of fruits and vegetables (data not shown). We also conducted analyses excluding the first year of follow-up and CRC cases that occurred within that time period (36 in the SWHS and 47 in the SMHS). Results were similar to those observed for the entire study population (data not shown). Additional sensitivity analyses stratified by the follow-up period of the SWHS (the first 5.5 years versus the second 5.5 years) were conducted. There were no differences in the associations of CRC and anthropometric measurements by number of follow-up years (data not shown).
DISCUSSION
Although CRC has been classified as an obesity-related cancer,(5) significant heterogeneity in the obesity and CRC association by cancer site and sex was suggested in this analysis of two large prospective cohort studies in China. We found that high BMI, WHR and WC were associated with increased risk of colon cancer in men but not in women. None of these anthropometric measurements were significantly associated with risk of rectal cancer. It is worth noting that unlike previous studies, most of which were conducted in Western populations, our study was conducted in a generally lean population of Chinese women and men, with a mean BMI of ≤24.0 kg/m2.
Adipose tissue is an endocrine organ responsible for the secretion of the adipokines that play a role in energy balance, inflammation, insulin sensitivity and angiogenesis.(27) Accumulation of adipose tissue, visceral adiposity in particular, confers an excess risk of insulin resistance.(28) Both insulin and insulin-like growth factor 1 are important determinants of cell proliferation and apoptosis and thus may promote carcinogenesis.(29, 30) Markers of insulin resistance have been associated with elevated risk of CRC.(31) Excess secretion of cytokines from adipose tissues can induce a chronic pro-inflammatory response, (32) possibly promoting colorectal carcinogenesis.(33)
BMI, a measure of general adiposity, has been used as the primary measure of body fatness in most previous cohort studies of CRC.(13-22, 34, 35) A positive association between BMI and CRC risk has been found in many, but not all, previous studies.(14-22, 35) In our study, men in the highest quintile of BMI had an over 2-fold increase in risk of colon cancer compared with the lowest quintile. An important limitation of BMI in measurement of overall body fatness is that this measure is unable to distinguish fat mass and non-fat mass, in particular among elderly people. On the other hand, WHR and WC, measures of central adiposity, are less affected by loss of muscle mass during aging and represent a measure of adiposity that takes into account of the accumulation of abdominal fat.(36) Among middle-aged and elderly adults, accumulation of visceral fat is a stronger determinant of insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia than general fat.(37, 38) Previous epidemiological studies have shown that CRC risk is more strongly related to WC or WHR than to BMI, although results are not entirely consistent.(13-16) In the present study, both measures for overall obesity (BMI) and central obesity (WHR or WC) were positively associated with colon cancer risk in men. However, the BMI-associated risk among men was attenuated and not statistically significant in analyses stratified by WHR, whereas the positive association between WHR and colon cancer risk remained significant in the high BMI stratum.
Our finding of a positive association between obesity and CRC risk in men but not in women is generally in agreement with previous observations.(13, 15-18, 20, 21, 34, 35) As summarized in a meta-analysis of prospective observational studies,(39) the elevated risk of CRC with increasing BMI is more pronounced in men than in women. The association of obesity with CRC in women is complicated by estrogen exposure. On the one hand, adipose tissue is the primary source of endogenous estrogen production among postmenopausal women.(40) Estrogen supplement use among postmenopausal women has been associated with reduced risk of CRC.(15) On the other hand, accumulation of adipose tissue results in insulin resistance and inflammation, which is positively related to CRC risk. It has been suggested that menopausal status (21) and hormonal replacement therapy (HRT) (15, 41) may modify the association of body fatness and CRC. However, we found no association of obesity measurements with CRC risk in either pre- or postmenopausal women. Only about 2% of SWHS participants reported having ever used HRT, (23) which hindered our assessment of potential effect modification by HRT. We can only speculate that among these relatively lean Chinese women, detrimental effects related to adipose tissue could be offset by its estrogenic effect. This hypothesis needs further evaluation.
We found that the association of adiposity with CRC differed by anatomic site. WHR and BMI were positively associated with risk of colon cancer but not rectal cancer, which is consistent with most previous reports,(14-16, 18, 39) suggesting that this risk factor does not contribute equally to colon and rectal cancers. The potential mechanisms driving this observation need further research.
Several limitations of our study should be considered when interpreting the results. Pre-clinical disease could influence weight and thus anthropometrics. However, sensitivity analyses conducted by excluding CRC cases occurring in the first year of follow-up showed no material changes in the risk estimates for CRC. In addition, despite having carefully adjusted for a range of potential confounding variables, including known risk factors for CRC and other lifestyle factors, we could not completely rule out the possibility of residual confounding due to unmeasured or inaccurately measured covariates. Changes in weight during the course of follow-up are likely. Failure to take weight change into consideration could attenuate the estimated association between obesity measurements and CRC risk, particularly in the SWHS. However, we did not find that the association of CRC risk and anthropometric measurements significantly differed by number of follow-up years in a stratified analysis in the SWHS. On the other hand, the short interval between anthropometric measurements and CRC events in the SMHS may have reduced the effect of fluctuations in body weight and fat distribution over time on the disease association. However, this raises another concern about the effect of subclinical illness on the results. In a sensitivity analysis, we omitted the first year of follow-up and excluded events occurring during the same time period from the analysis to minimize the potential bias. These exclusions did not significantly alter the results in either cohort.
In summary, our finding from these two large prospective studies confirms a positive association between obesity and colon cancer in men. Furthermore, our study suggests that central obesity plays a more important role in colon carcinogenesis than does general obesity. Potential differences in the obesity and colorectal cancer association by sex and anatomic site (colon versus rectum) warrant further investigation.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was supported by United States Public Health Service grants R01CA082729 (PI: X. O. Shu), R37CA070867 (PI: W. Zheng) and R01CA122364 (PI: G. Yang). We are grateful to the participants and research staff of the Shanghai Women’s and Men’s Health Study for their contributions to the studies. We also thank Ms. Bethanie Rammer for her assistance in preparing the manuscript.
Footnotes
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None of the authors had any financial conflicts of interest to declare.
References
- 1.Ferlay J, Shin HR, Bray F, Forman D, Mathers C, Parkin DM. GLOBOCAN 2008 v1.2, Cancer Incidence and Mortality Worldwide: IARC CancerBase No.10 [Internet] International Agency for Research on Cancer; Lyon, France: 2010. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Gao Y, Lu W. Cancer incidence, mortality and survival rates in urban Shanghai (1973-2000) Second Military Medical University Press; Shanghai: 2007. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Jin F, Devesa SS, Chow WH, Zheng W, Ji BT, Fraumeni JJ, et al. Cancer incidence trends in urban shanghai, 1972-1994: an update. Int J Cancer. 1999;83:435–440. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0215(19991112)83:4<435::aid-ijc1>3.0.co;2-j. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Wang H, Du S, Zhai F, Popkin BM. Trends in the distribution of body mass index among Chinese adults, aged 20-45 years (1989-2000) Int J Obes (Lond) 2007;31:272–278. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.IARC. International Agency for Research in Cancer . Weight Control and Physical Activity. In: Vainio H, Bianchini F, editors. Handbooks of Cancer Prevention. IARC Press; Lyon: 2002. pp. 85–94. [Google Scholar]
- 6.Food, Nutriton, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. 2nd edn American Institute for Cancer Research; Washington: 2007. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Ning Y, Wang L, Giovannucci EL. A quantitative analysis of body mass index and colorectal cancer: findings from 56 observational studies. Obes Rev. 2010;11:19–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2009.00613.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Moghaddam AA, Woodward M, Huxley R. Obesity and risk of colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of 31 studies with 70,000 events. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007;16:2533–2547. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0708. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Larsson SC, Wolk A. Obesity and colon and rectal cancer risk: a meta-analysis of prospective studies. Am J Clin Nutr. 2007;86:556–565. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/86.3.556. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Dai Z, Xu YC, Niu L. Obesity and colorectal cancer risk: a meta-analysis of cohort studies. World J Gastroenterol. 2007;13:4199–4206. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i31.4199. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Matsuo K, Mizoue T, Tanaka K, Tsuji I, Sugawara Y, Sasazuki S, et al. Association between body mass index and the colorectal cancer risk in Japan: pooled analysis of population-based cohort studies in Japan. Ann Oncol. 2011 doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdr143. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Giovannucci E. Obesity, gender, and colon cancer. Gut. 2002;51:147. doi: 10.1136/gut.51.2.147. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.MacInnis RJ, English DR, Hopper JL, Gertig DM, Haydon AM, Giles GG. Body size and composition and colon cancer risk in women. Int J Cancer. 2006;118:1496–1500. doi: 10.1002/ijc.21508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.MacInnis RJ, English DR, Hopper JL, Haydon AM, Gertig DM, Giles GG. Body size and composition and colon cancer risk in men. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2004;13:553–559. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Pischon T, Lahmann PH, Boeing H, Friedenreich C, Norat T, Tjonneland A, et al. Body size and risk of colon and rectal cancer in the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:920–931. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj246. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Wang Y, Jacobs EJ, Patel AV, Rodriguez C, McCullough ML, Thun MJ, et al. A prospective study of waist circumference and body mass index in relation to colorectal cancer incidence. Cancer Causes Control. 2008;19:783–792. doi: 10.1007/s10552-008-9141-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Moore LL, Bradlee ML, Singer MR, Splansky GL, Proctor MH, Ellison RC, et al. BMI and waist circumference as predictors of lifetime colon cancer risk in Framingham Study adults. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004;28:559–567. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0802606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Adams KF, Leitzmann MF, Albanes D, Kipnis V, Mouw T, Hollenbeck A, et al. Body mass and colorectal cancer risk in the NIH-AARP cohort. Am J Epidemiol. 2007;166:36–45. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwm049. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Lin J, Zhang SM, Cook NR, Rexrode KM, Lee IM, Buring JE. Body mass index and risk of colorectal cancer in women (United States) Cancer Causes Control. 2004;15:581–589. doi: 10.1023/B:CACO.0000036168.23351.f1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Otani T, Iwasaki M, Inoue M. Body mass index, body height, and subsequent risk of colorectal cancer in middle-aged and elderly Japanese men and women: Japan public health center-based prospective study. Cancer Causes Control. 2005;16:839–850. doi: 10.1007/s10552-005-4573-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Terry PD, Miller AB, Rohan TE. Obesity and colorectal cancer risk in women. Gut. 2002;51:191–194. doi: 10.1136/gut.51.2.191. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Thygesen LC, Gronbaek M, Johansen C, Fuchs CS, Willett WC, Giovannucci E. Prospective weight change and colon cancer risk in male US health professionals. Int J Cancer. 2008;123:1160–1165. doi: 10.1002/ijc.23612. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Zheng W, Chow WH, Yang G, Jin F, Rothman N, Blair A, et al. The Shanghai Women’s Health Study: rationale, study design, and baseline characteristics. Am J Epidemiol. 2005;162:1123–1131. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwi322. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Cai H, Zheng W, Xiang YB, Xu WH, Yang G, Li H, et al. Dietary patterns and their correlates among middle-aged and elderly Chinese men: a report from the Shanghai Men’s Health Study. Br J Nutr. 2007;98:1006–1013. doi: 10.1017/S0007114507750900. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Zhang X, Shu XO, Gao YT, Yang G, Matthews CE, Li Q, et al. Anthropometric predictors of coronary heart disease in Chinese women. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 2004;28:734–740. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0802634. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Chan AT, Giovannucci EL. Primary prevention of colorectal cancer. Gastroenterology. 2010;138:2029–2043. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2010.01.057. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Siddiqui AA. Metabolic syndrome and its association with colorectal cancer: a review. Am J Med Sci. 2011;341:227–231. doi: 10.1097/MAJ.0b013e3181df9055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Donohoe CL, Doyle SL, Reynolds JV. Visceral adiposity, insulin resistance and cancer risk. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2011;3:12. doi: 10.1186/1758-5996-3-12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Giovannucci E. Nutrition, insulin, insulin-like growth factors and cancer. Horm Metab Res. 2003;35:694–704. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-814147. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Koohestani N, Tran TT, Lee W, Wolever TM, Bruce WR. Insulin resistance and promotion of aberrant crypt foci in the colons of rats on a high-fat diet. Nutr Cancer. 1997;29:69–76. doi: 10.1080/01635589709514604. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Yamamoto S, Nakagawa T, Matsushita Y, Kusano S, Hayashi T, Irokawa M, et al. Visceral fat area and markers of insulin resistance in relation to colorectal neoplasia. Diabetes Care. 2010;33:184–189. doi: 10.2337/dc09-1197. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Hotamisligil GS. Inflammation and metabolic disorders. Nature. 2006;444:860–867. doi: 10.1038/nature05485. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Ullman TA, Itzkowitz SH. Intestinal inflammation and cancer. Gastroenterology. 2011;140:1807–1816. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.01.057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.MacInnis RJ, English DR, Haydon AM, Hopper JL, Gertig DM, Giles GG. Body size and composition and risk of rectal cancer (Australia) Cancer Causes Control. 2006;17:1291–1297. doi: 10.1007/s10552-006-0074-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Oxentenko AS, Bardia A, Vierkant RA, Wang AH, Anderson KE, Campbell PT, et al. Body size and incident colorectal cancer: a prospective study of older women. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2010;3:1608–1620. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-10-0116. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Leitzmann MF, Moore SC, Koster A, Harris TB, Park Y, Hollenbeck A, et al. Waist circumference as compared with body-mass index in predicting mortality from specific causes. PLoS One. 2011;6:e18582. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018582. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Kissebah AH, Vydelingum N, Murray R, Evans DJ, Hartz AJ, Kalkhoff RK, et al. Relation of body fat distribution to metabolic complications of obesity. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1982;54:254–260. doi: 10.1210/jcem-54-2-254. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Racette SB, Evans EM, Weiss EP, Hagberg JM, Holloszy JO. Abdominal adiposity is a stronger predictor of insulin resistance than fitness among 50-95 year olds. Diabetes Care. 2006;29:673–678. doi: 10.2337/diacare.29.03.06.dc05-1605. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Renehan AG, Tyson M, Egger M, Heller RF, Zwahlen M. Body-mass index and incidence of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies. Lancet. 2008;371:569–578. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60269-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Tamimi RM, Hankinson SE, Colditz GA, Byrne C. Endogenous sex hormone levels and mammographic density among postmenopausal women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:2641–2647. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0558. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Nelson HD, Humphrey LL, Nygren P, Teutsch SM, Allan JD. Postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy: scientific review. JAMA. 2002;288:872–881. doi: 10.1001/jama.288.7.872. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]