Skip to main content
. 2019 Jun 5;112(3):286–294. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djz122

Table 2.

Odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals* for incident liver cancer comparing men in the 90th and 10th percentiles, based on the distribution in controls, for top metabolites, using conditional logistic regression

Chemical class and metabolite Unadjusted model Model 1† >0 to 10 years of follow-up (model 1)†,‡ >10 years of follow-up (model 1)†,§ Model 2 (diet adjusted)†,‖
Alkaloid
 Trigonelline 0.33 (0.19 to 0.56) 0.37 (0.20 to 0.67) 0.10 (0.03 to 0.40) 0.59 (0.29 to 1.22) 0.46 (0.22 to 0.96)
P <.001 .001 .001 .15 .04
Amino Acid
 Tyrosine 5.06 (2.74 to 9.33) 3.93 (2.00 to 7.74) 7.21 (1.77 to 29.31) 3.35 (1.49 to 7.56) 3.60 (1.72 to 7.51)
P <.001 <.001 .006 .004 <.001
Indoleamine
 Serotonin 0.32 (0.20 to 0.53) 0.33 (0.19 to 0.58) 0.28 (0.10 to 0.84) 0.41 (0.21 to 0.82) 0.36 (0.20 to 0.65)
P <.001 <.001 .02 .01 <.001
Dipeptide
 Leucyl-valine 0.24 (0.14 to 0.43) 0.22 (0.12 to 0.41) 0.31 (0.10 to 0.97) 0.12 (0.05 to 0.29) 0.20 (0.10 to 0.40)
P <.001 <.001 .04 <.001 <.001
Bile Acid
 Glycochenodeoxycholic acid 3.92 (2.34 to 6.59) 3.99 (2.22 to 7.17) 5.70 (1.91 to 17.02) 3.76 (1.74 to 8.12) 3.73 (1.97 to 7.05)
P <.001 <.001 .002 <.001 <.001
 Glycocholic acid 5.00 (2.84 to 8.80) 4.95 (2.64 to 9.29) 8.09 (2.25 to 29.03) 4.65 (2.03 to 10.64) 4.43 (2.27 to 8.64)
P <.001 <.001 .001 <.001 <.001
Glycerophospholipid
 LysoPC(15:0) 0.20 (0.11 to 0.35) 0.17 (0.09 to 0.34) 0.09 (0.02 to 0.37) 0.27 (0.12 to 0.61) 0.15 (0.06 to 0.35)
P <.001 <.001 <.001 <.001 <.001
 LysoPC(P-16:0) 0.15 (0.08 to 0.28) 0.21 (0.10 to 0.40) 0.04 (0.01 to 0.22) 0.30 (0.14 to 0.67) 0.21 (0.10 to 0.43)
P <.001 <.001 <.001 .003 <.001
 LysoPC(18:2) 0.21 (0.12 to 0.37) 0.24 (0.13 to 0.45) 0.13 (0.03 to 0.48) 0.30 (0.15 to 0.62) 0.21 (0.11 to 0.42)
P <.001 <.001 .002 .001 <.001
Purine derivative
 Hypoxanthine 0.19 (0.10 to 0.35) 0.19 (0.10 to 0.38) 0.11 (0.02 to 0.47) 0.26 (0.11 to 0.58) 0.21 (0.10 to 0.43)
P <.001 <.001 .003 .001 <.001
*

ORs for 221 liver cancer cases and 221 matched controls are scaled to compare the 90th to the 10th percentile of metabolite values (modeled on a continuous basis) based on the distribution in the controls; letting X90 and X10 denote the 90th percentile and 10th percentile in controls, and β denote the log(OR) from the conditional logistic regression model, the OR is eβ(X90−X10). CI = confidence interval; LysoPC = lysophosphatidylcholine; OR = odds ratio.

Models adjusted for entry age (years), body mass index (kg/m2), smoking intensity (cigarettes per day), smoking duration (years), alcohol intake (none, <11.6 g/day, ≥11.6 g/day, or missing), self-reported diabetes status (yes or no), education (≤ or > elementary education), and run order.

n = 146 (73 cases; 73 matched controls); missing alcohol assigned to highest frequency category owing to unstable risk estimates.

§

n = 296 (148 cases; 148 matched controls).

Models additionally adjusted for coffee intake (none, <1, 1 to <2, 2 to <3, or ≥3 cups [8 oz] per day), fruit and vegetable intake (g/1000 kcal), red meat intake (g/1000 kcal), white meat intake (g/1000 kcal), processed meat intake (g/1000 kcal), fish intake (g/1000 kcal), saturated fat intake (g/1000 kcal), energy intake (kcal); individuals with missing food frequency questionnaire data were grouped using an indicator variable.

P-value for χ2 test obtained from conditional logistic regression model for a given metabolite (modeled on a continuous basis); all tests were two-sided.