Table 4.

Logistic regression analysis of factors predicting cancers in movement disorders

Unadjusted model				Liberal adjusted model1				Conservative adjusted model4
diagnosis	OR	95% CI	significance	diagnosis	OR	95% CI	significance	diagnosis	OR	95% CI	significance
Any type of cancer
PD	1.69	0.99–2.86	0.05	PD	1.97	1.049–3.71	0.04	PD	1.69	0.99–2.86	0.05
ET	1.09	0.66–1.81	0.73	ET	1.08	0.62–1.89	0.79	ET	1.09	0.66–1.81	0.73
Dystonia	1.20	0.62–2.32	0.59	Dystonia	1.16	0.58–2.32	0.67	Dystonia	1.20	0.62–2.32	0.59
Controls	1.00			Controls	1.00			Controls	1.00
Unadjusted model				Liberal adjusted model2				Conservative adjusted model4
Melanoma
PD	9.84	2.20–44.09	0.003	PD	7.09	1.52–33.0	0.01	PD	9.84	2.20–44.09	0.003
ET	3.73	0.78–17.89	0.10	ET	4.10	0.83–20.2	0.08	ET	3.73	0.78–17.89	0.10
Dystonia	4.88	0.87–27.50	0.07	Dystonia	5.27	0.90–30.93	0.06	Dystonia	4.88	0.87–27.50	0.07
Controls	1.00			Controls	1.00			Controls	1.00
Unadjusted model				Liberal adjusted model3				Conservative adjusted model4
Integumentary cancers
PD	3.63	1.86–7.11	0.0002	PD	2.63	1.24–5.62	0.01	PD	3.63	1.86–7.11	0.0002
ET	1.75	0.88–3.47	0.10	ET	1.47	0.71–3.06	0.31	ET	1.75	0.88–3.47	0.10
Dystonia	2.54	1.13–5.74	0.03	Dystonia	2.21	0.90–5.45	0.07	Dystonia	2.54	1.13–5.74	0.03
Controls	1.00			Controls	1.00			Controls	1.00

¹Adjusted for number of prescription medications, age in years, Caucasian race and Cumulative Illness Rating Scale Score.

²Adjusted for number of prescription medications.

³Adjusted for number of prescription medications and years since last hospitalization.

⁴The conservative model resembled the unadjusted model because there were no variables that met stringent criteria for inclusion in the model.

Liberal models included variables that were associated either with the cancer in question or the diagnosis in question.

Conservative models included variables that were associated both with the cancer in question and the diagnosis in question.