Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2020 Dec 28;15(12):e0243561. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243561

Determinants of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma at Felegehiwot specialized hospital, North West Ethiopia: A case-control study

Dessalegn Chekol 1,#, Melkamu Bedimo 2,#, Yihun Mulugeta 2,#, Getasew Mulat Bantie 3,*,#
Editor: Yan Li4
PMCID: PMC7769477  PMID: 33370329

Abstract

Background

The global burden of cancer continues to increase largely because of the aging and growth of the world population alongside an increasing adoption of cancer-causing behaviors. Hence, the purpose of this study was to identify determinants of Non-Hodgkin lymphoma cancer among individuals who diagnosed at the Felegehiwot specialized hospital, North West Ethiopia, 2019.

Methods

An institution-based unmatched case-control study was conducted at the Felegehiwot Specialized hospital from December 2018 up to June 2019. The sample size calculated using the two-population proportion formula. The final sample size was 486, (162 cases and 324 controls). The simple random sampling method was employed to catch up with the estimated samples. The collected data entered into the Epi-data version 3.1 software and analyzed using SPSS version 21 software. Descriptive statistics computed. Simple logistic analysis was run (at 95% CI and p-value < 0.05) to identify the determinants of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Result

A total of 486 patients participated. Nearly one-third of the cases and controls were in the age group of 46–60 years. About 90% of cases and 91% of controls were orthodox Christian. Monthly income of ≤28 dollars (AOR = 2. 73, 95%CI: 1. 8, 4.2), male sex (AOR = 1. 8, 95%CI: 1.2, 2.8), ever had chemical exposure, (AOR = 11. 9, 95%CI: 7.6, 18.8), no regular physical exercise (AOR = 15. 5, 95%CI: 5.7, 42.3), and having hypertension [AOR = 0. 03; 95%CI:0.005, 0.2), lung disease (AOR = 0. 2; 95%CI: 0.06, 0.7), and chronic kidney and cardiac diseases (AOR = 0. 06; 95%CI: 0.01, 0.2) were the determinants of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Conclusions

The findings in this study suggest that having a low monthly income, being male sex, ever had chemical exposure, not engaged in regular physical exercise, and being diabetic were the determinants of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Background

In Africa, approximately 300, 000 cases of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) occur each year. The infections are among the top ten causes of cancer in this continent region [1]. In Ethiopia, studies showed that there are more than 150,000 cancer cases per year [2]. Reports indicated that 540 cancer cases from September 2014 to August 2015 seen at the University of Gondar Hospital, North-West Ethiopia, of whom 93 were lymphomas [2]. The estimated number of new cases in Ethiopia in 2018 is 67,573 (both sexes); Of whom 3,470 were NHL [3].

Lifestyle-related risk factors such as body weight, physical activity, diet, and tobacco use play a vital role in developing NHL [4]. Thus, identifying the risk factors for NHL may improve our understanding of the disease and is of very crucial for policymakers and other concerned stack holders at national as well as regional levels to design evidence-based intervention strategies to give emphasis and tackle the determinants of the NHL.

Methods

Study design, setting, and period

An institution-based unmatched case-control study was conducted at the Felegehiwot specialized hospital from November 2018 up to June 2019. The hospital found in Bahir Dar city, Amhara region, 564 km apart from Addis Ababa, the capital city of Ethiopia. It is the only public hospital in the Bahir Dar city, offering services to the dwellers of the region and the Amhara regional state. The hospital serves about five million people of the Amhara regional state communities. The hospital comprises of outpatient, inpatient, emergency, delivery, laboratory, ART, psychiatry, pharmacy, x-ray, physiotherapy, radiology, and oncology department. The oncology department of this hospital established in 2017. Since then, 169 patients attending at the oncology department registered in the logbook.

Sample size determination

The sample size was determined using Epi- Info version 7 software, with the model of stat calc Fleiss W/CC. The identified determinants of NHL (reviewed from previously published articles) were cigarette smoking, coffee drinking, history of cancer, exposure to pesticides, and lifestyle [58]. Then, considering the result of these determinants, the predictor that has the largest estimated sample size was taken. Other common assumptions of 1:2 ratio of cases to controls, 80% power, adjusted odds ratio at 95% confidence interval, and a 5% margin of error used. Then, the final estimated samples were 486 (Table 1).

Table 1. Determinants for the sample size estimation of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma at Felegehiwot specialized hospital, northwest Ethiopia, 2019.

Variable AOR Proportions of the exposed cases Proportions of the exposed controls Required samples Total Samples References
Cases Controls
Cigarette Smoking 2.4 50 29.4 65 129 194 Fabbro-Peray, et al., 2001
Coffee drinking 2.9 94.1 84.6 141 281 422
History of cancer 2.6 34.1 16.6 67 134 201 Hardell, L. et al., 1999
Exposure to pesticides 3.7 10.3 3 115 229 334 Balasubramaniam, G., et al., 2013
Lifestyle 2.79 94.5 86 162 324 486 Cerhan, J.R., et al., 1997

Sampling procedure

Cases

Were NHL patients who diagnosed and confirmed histo-pathologically (162 out of 169). Then, the recruited patient medical record reviewed. Finally, histo-pathologically confirmed NHL patients interviewed during the study period.

Controls

Chronically ill medical patients who had non-cancerous pathology result and follow-up in the medical department were the controls. Two controls for each case took by a systematic sampling technique from the list of the service delivery logbook. Then, the recruited patient medical record reviewed; Finally, a chronically ill, non-cancerous, medical patient interviewed during the study period.

Exclusion criteria

Cases

The seven histo-pathologically non-confirmed patients and not on follow up in the oncology department of the hospital were excluded.

Controls

Non-cancerous, chronically ill medical patients, who had not pathology result attached to their charts and not on follow-up in the medical department of the hospital excluded.

Data collection tool and procedure

The data collected via primary and secondary data sources. The secondary sources of data retrieved from reviewing of the patient’s medical records. Then, the primary data collected by using a pre-tested structured questionnaire adapted from a variety of literature [58] ‘S1 File’. The questionnaire comprised of socio-demographic, feeding practice, and exposure to carcinogenic chemicals related characteristics. It translated into Amharic (the indigenous) language by the independent translator (Ph.D. in linguistics). Then, back to English to check for consistency. The principal investigator gave two days of rigorous training to two enumerators (BSc in clinical nurse) and one supervisor (MPH in Epidemiology). The enumerators conducted role-play before the actual data collection period. Finally, the data were collected using the Amharic version of the questionnaire. Each questionnaire examined daily for completeness and consistency by the supervisor and the principal investigator. Appropriate feedback gave to the enumerators.

Data management and analysis

Data entry, cleaning, and coding were performed using Epi-data version 3.1 software and analysis done by SPSS version 20 software. Descriptive statistics were computed and presented using tables and texts. The bivariable regression model initially fitted to compute the crude odds ratio (COR), and variables with p-values less than 0.2 entered into the multivariable logistic regression model to control potential confounding effects in the model. The strength of associations between the determinants and the non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma assessed using the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) with a 95% CI. Variables with p-values less than 0.05 in the multivariable analysis considered as the determinants of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Ethical approval obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Bahir Dar University. Permission letter was obtained from the Amhara National, Regional state Health Bureau and Public Health Institute prior to the data collection period. We authors can assure that the Institutional Review Board of Bahir Dar University waived the need for parental consent for minority groups. Before collecting the data, for patients whose age 7–12 years written consent received from parents/guardians and assent of patients; and for 13–17 years old patients,’ assents secured solely from them with parental/guardian permission. For older than 17 years patients, consent received solely from them. The names of the patients did not use to ensure anonymity and confidentiality. All information obtained from the patients was kept confidential.

Results

Socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents

A total of 486 (162 cases and 324 controls) study participants at followup in the Felegehiwot specialized hospital were interviewed and yielded a response rate of 100%.

A larger portion of cases (34%) and controls (35.2%) were in the age group of 46–60 years. About ninety percent of cases and controls were Orthodox Christian. The majority of the cases (84%) and controls (84.3%) were from the Amhara ethnic group. About two-thirds of cases and controls were unable to read and write. The majority of the cases and controls were married. More than three-fourths of the respondents come from a rural area, and more than one-fourth of the respondents were farmers (Table 2).

Table 2. Sociodemographic characteristics of the respondents at Felegehiwot specialized hospital, northwest Ethiopia, 2019.

Variable Category Cases Controls X2, P-Value
N (%) N (%)
Age <15 years 10 (6.2) 4 (1.2) 16.691, 0.005
15–30 years 21 (13.0) 59 (18.2)
31–45 years 33 (20.4) 84 (25.9)
46–60 years 55 (33.9) 114 (35.2)
61–75 years 36 (22.2) 46 (14.2)
>75 years 7 (4.3) 17 (5.3)
Sex Male 106 (65.4) 177 (54.6) 5.182, 0.023
Female 56 (34.6) 147 (45.4)
Residence Urban 16 (9.9) 79 (24.4) 14.451, 0.0001
Rural 146 (90.1) 245 (75.6)
Religion Orthodox 146 (90.1) 295 (91.1) 3.29, 0.193
Protestant 5 (3.1) 3 (0.9)
Muslim 11 (6.8) 26 (8.0)
Ethnicity Amhara 136 (84.0) 273 (84.3) 0.008, 0.930
Non-Amhara 26 (16.0) 51 (15.7)
Educational status Unable to read and write 106 (65.4) 216 (66.6) 2.207, 0.531
Elementary 41 (25.3) 67 (20.7)
Secondary 9 (5.6) 23 (7.1)
Diploma and above 6 (3.7) 18 (5.6)
Occupation Farmer 70 (43.2) 100 (30.9) 11.255, 0.047
Housewife 43 (26.5) 91 (28.1)
Government employee 6 (3.7) 27 (8.3)
Military 3 (1.9) 3 (0.9)
Factory worker 12 (7.4) 25 (7.7)
Day laborer 28 (17.3) 78 (24.1)
Marital Status Married 107 (66.0) 197 (60.8) 1.269, 0.260
Unmarried 55(34.0) 127 (39.2)
Monthly Income ≤28 USD dollar 112 (69.1) 141 (43.5) 28.398, 0.0001
>28 dollar 50 (30.9) 183 (56.5)

USD: United States Dollar

Chemical exposure-related characteristics

About seventy-eight percent of the cases and twenty-two percent of the controls had previous exposure to carcinogenic chemicals. More than one-third of the respondents exposed to Herbicides. Half of the respondents exposed for more than fifteen years. About eight percent of the cases and five percent of the controls were cigarette smokers. Fifty-four percent of cases and sixty-two percent of controls smoked for more than ten years, respectively. Eighty-six percent of cases and sixty-seven percent of controls drunk. Eighty-eight percent of cases and eighty-three percent of controls drunk cultural alcohol. Eighty-six percent of cases and seventy-four percent of controls were coffee drunkest. Of which, three-fourth of them drunk coffee for more than thirty years (Table 3).

Table 3. Chemical exposure-related characteristics of the respondents at Felegehiwot specialized hospital, northwest Ethiopia, 2019.

Variable Category Cases Control X2, P-Value
N (%) N (%)
Ever had chemical exposure No 36 (22.2) 251 (77.5) 136.32, 0.001
Yes 126 (77.8) 73 (22.5)
Smoking Cigarette No 149 (92.0) 309 (95.4) 2.29, 0.130
Yes 13 (8.0) 15 (4.6)
Years of smoked ≤ 10 years 6 (46.2) 5 (33.3) 0.480, 0.488
> 10 years 7 (53.8) 10 (66.7)
Alcohol drink No 22 (13.6) 116 (35.8) 26.231, 0.001
Yes 140 (86.4) 208 (64.2)
Types of alcohol taken Beer 16 (11.4) 36 (17.3) 2.276, 0.131
Cultural alcohol 124 (88.6) 172 (82.7)
Coffee drink No 22 (13.6) 83 (25.6) 9.239, 0.002
Yes 140 (86.4) 241 (74.4)
Years of drinking coffee < 20 years 14 (10.0) 32 (13.3) 0.896, 0.344
≥ 20 years 126 (90.0) 209 (86.7)

Behavioral and feeding practice-related characteristics

More than two-thirds of the respondents had regular physical exercise, and more than half of the cases had a history of chronic illness. More than one-third of the cases (40%) and one-fourth of controls (26%) had lung disease (COPD). Two-third of the cases and about sixty percent of controls didn’t know their HIV status. More than one-fourth of the cases and controls have started treatment on time (Table 4).

Table 4. Behavioral and feeding practice-related characteristics of the respondents at Felegehiwot specialized hospital, northwest Ethiopia, 2019.

Variable Category Cases Control X2, P-Value
N (%) N (%)
Regular physical exercise Yes 35 (21.6) 120 (37.0) 11.84, 0.001
No 127 (78.4) 204 (63.0)
Had chronic diseases other than cancer No 75 (46.3) _ ------
Yes 87 (53.7) 324 (100)
Types of a chronic disease Diabetes Mellitus 25 (28.7) 73 (22.5) 17.27, 0.002
Liver disease 4 (4.6) 32 (9.9)
Hypertension 3 (3.4) 53 (16.4)
Lung disease (COPD) 35 (40.2) 82 (25.3)
Other 20 (23.0) 84 (25.9)
HIV status No 109 (67.3) 189 (58.3) 15.58, 0.001
Yes 26 (16.0) 30 (9.3)
Unknown 27 (16.7) 105 (32.4)
Previous feeding practice Meat 17 (10.5) 36 (11.1) 5.92, 0.205
Vegetation 9 (5.6) 15 (4.6)
Non- vegetation 2 (1.2) 12 (3.7)
Milk 7 (4.3) 28 (8.6)
Other€€ 127 (78.4) 233 (71.9)
You got treatment for the chronic disease No 19 (11.7) 32 (9.9) 0.39, 0.530
Yes 143 (88.3) 292 (90.1)
Outcomes of the treatment Progressed 112 (78.3) 203 (79.5) 4.35, 0.226
Deteriorated 8 (5.6) 20 (6.8)
Same 22 (15.4) 66 (22.5)
Not mentioned 1 (0.6) 3 (1.0)
BMI of the patient <18.5 kg/h2 49 (30.2) 227 (70.1) ------
18.5–24.9 kg/h2 113 (69.8) 96 (29.6)
25–29.9 kg/h2 0 (0.0) 1 (0.3)
Where treated when the disease starts Traditional medicine 26 (16.0) 32 (9.9) 4.61, 0.1
Modern medicine 78 (48.1) 180 (55.6)
Holy water 58 (35.8) 112 (34.6)

Other: Chronic kidney disease and cardiac failure; other€€: nutritional intake of ‘Injjera with watt’ or Bread; holy water: water blessed by a priest and used in religious ceremonies.

Factors associated with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma

In the univariate logistic regression analysis, sex, residence, occupational status, monthly income, ever had chemical exposure, drinking alcohol, drinking coffee, had a regular physical exercise, type of chronic diseases, and HIV screening status were factors associated with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma at a 20% level of significance. In the multivariable logistic regression analysis, only sex, monthly income, ever had chemical exposure, had a regular physical exercise, and type of chronic disease were the determinants of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma at p = 0.05.

Accordingly, for those male participants, the odds of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma was about two (AOR = 1. 8, 95% CI:1.2, 2.8) fold higher compared with female participants. Similarly, those participants whose monthly income of equal or less than 28 dollars, the odds of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma were about three (AOR = 2. 73,95% CI:1.8, 4.2) times higher compared with income of beyond 28 dollars.

Those participants who had a history of chemical exposure, the odds of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma were twelve (AOR = 11. 98, 95%CI: 7.62, 18.85) times higher compared with those who hadn’t a history of chemical exposure. Those participants who hadn’t regular physical exercise, the odds of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma were about fifteen (AOR = 15. 5, 95% CI: 5.7, 42.3) times higher compared with those who had regular physical exercise. Moreover, participants who had hypertension (AOR = 0. 03, 95%CI: 0. 005, 0.18), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AOR = 0. 2, 95%CI: 0.06, 0.7), chronic kidney and cardiac diseases (AOR = 0. 06, 95%CI: 0.01,0.2) were less likely at risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma compared with those who had diabetes mellitus (Table 5).

Table 5. Simple logistic regression on determinants of NHL at Felegehiwot specialized hospital, northwest Ethiopia, 2019.

Variable Category NHL COR (95% CI) AOR (95% CI) P-value
Cases Controls
Sex Male 106 177 1.6 (1.1, 2.3) 1.8 (1.2, 2.8) 0.004
Female 56 147 1.00 1.00
Residence Urban 16 79 0.34 (0.2,0.6) 0.55 (0.3, 1.1) 0.061
Rural 146 245 1.00 1.00
Occupation Farmer 70 100 1.00 1.00
Housewife 43 91 0.7 (0.4, 1.1) 2.3 (0.6, 3.0) 0.161
Government employee 6 27 0.3 (0.1,0.8) 0.93 (0.3, 2.7) 0.891
Military 3 3 1.4 (0.3, 7.3) 1.69 (0.3, 9.7) 0.556
Factory workers 12 25 0.7 (0.3, 1.4) 1.1 (0.5, 2.6) 0.769
Others 28 78 0.5 (0.3, 0.9) 0.6 (0.3, 1.1) 0.131
Monthly income ≤ 28 Dollars 112 141 2.9 (1.9, 4.3) 2.73 (1.8, 4.2) 0.0001
> 28 Dollars 50 183 1.00 1.00
Ever had chemical exposure No 36 251 1.00 1.00
Yes 126 73 11.98 (7.62,18.85) 11.9 (7.6,18.8) 0.0001
Alcohol drinking No 22 116 1.00 1.00
Yes 140 208 3.5 (2.1, 5.8) 1.47 (0.82,2.65) 0.198
Coffee drinking No 22 83 1.00 1.00
Yes 140 241 2.2 (1.3,3.6) 1.36 (0.75,2.48) 0.316
Had a regular physical exercise Yes 35 120 1.00 1.00
No 127 204 2.1 (1.3, 3.3) 15.5 (5.7,42.3) 0.0001
Types of chronic diseases Diabetes Mellitus 25 73 1.00 1.00
Liver disease 4 32 1.1 (0.3, 4.7) 0.3 (0.02,3.8) 0.365
Hypertension 3 53 0.2 (0.1,0.6) 0.03 (0.005,0.2) 0.0001
COPD 35 82 1.1 (0.5,2.01) 0.2 (0.06, 0.7) 0.011
Others# 20 84 0.4 (0.2,0.8) 0.06 (0.01,0.2) 0.0001
HIV status No 109 189 2.2 (1.4,3.6) 1.6 (0.5,4.8) 0.399
Yes 26 30 3.4 (1.7,6.6) 1.2 (0.3,5.004) 0.812
Unknown 27 105 1.00 1.00

COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; Others#: chronic kidney disease and cardiac failure

Discussion

Monthly income

This study investigated the determinants of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. It was recognized that monthly income as one of the crucial determinants of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Respondents who had monthly income of less than or equal to 28 dollars were about threefold more at risk to NHL compared to those who had greater than 28 dollars. A study done at Glostrup University Hospital, Denmark [9], supports the current study finding. The possible justification for this could be, little income enforces them to a low quality of living. As a result, it may expose to different forms of cancer like NHL. It is also could be justified, even if the study participants had health-seeking behavior, they become tied to not gain it due to the inability to cover the cost of the service. That might also increase the risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Sex

The odds of having an NHL in males were 2 times higher compared to females. This is in line with the study findings of Yale University, USA [10]. The reason for this risk difference between the two sexes could be males in our country are highly exposed to out-door work. And the majority of the respondents in our study were farmers, in which their work mainly confined to farm work. As a result, they may be more exposed to carcinogenic chemicals like herbicides and pesticides. This result supports the study findings of Yale University, USA [10], Sweden [8], and meta-analysis report [11].

Ever had chemical exposure

Ever had a history of exposure for chemicals were found to be the root cause for the NHL. It found out in this study that; respondents who had chemical exposure were 12 times more likely at risk for NHL than those who had not. This result supports the findings of Yale University, USA [10], Sweden [8], and meta-analysis report [11]. However, a study finding in the USA showed that respondents who exposed to chemicals protected from NHL [12].

Because the majority of chemicals are carcinogenic by their nature, and the current study showed four-fold riskier compare to the studies conducted in developed countries. The other reason could be having inadequate awareness and knowledge of the dangerous chemicals.

Regular physical exercise

Not having regular physical exercise and the type of chronic illness, they had, were the determinants of the NHL. The odds of being caught by NHL from non-regular physical exercising respondents were about five times more likely at risk than those who did in the past. This finding is in line with the studies of California [13] and Canada, Ottawa [14]. There is a risk difference between the current study and the latter two studies. Because in Ethiopia, regular physical exercise is not habitual compared to California and the Canadian population.

Types of chronic disease

The current study revealed that the likelihood of risk for NHL among various chronic ill patients was different. Respondents who had hypertension, COPD, chronic kidney disease, and cardiac failure were less at risk for NHL compared with those who had diabetes mellitus. This study finding supported by a meta-analysis study [15] as DM patients were at high risk for NHL. However, the underlying mechanism is unclear. The possible justification for this result could be Diabetes Mellitus (type two) is an autoimmune disease, which may aggravate the chance of the NHL occurrence. Future studies should focus on elucidating potential pathophysiologic links between diabetes and NHL.

Strength and limitation of the study

The current case-control study provides stronger evidence than a cross-sectional and descriptive studies. The current case-control study provides stronger evidence than a cross-sectional and descriptive studies. The selection of each case based on a histopathological confirmation makes the study stronger. The limitations of this study could be the possibility of recall bias, the selection of controls, and the assessment of exposure and power issues.

Another limitation of this study was measurement error; though training on measurements and standard procedures given, it could not be a 100% perfect on the measurement of weight and height.

Conclusions

This study identified the determinants of the NHL. Having a low monthly income, being male sex, ever had chemical exposure, not engaged in regular physical exercise, and being diabetic patient was at an increased risk for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Supporting information

S1 File. English version questionnaire.

(PDF)

S2 File. SPSS data—with no identifiers.

(SAV)

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank data collators, supervisors and study patients for their contributions.

Data Availability

All the data can access from the manuscript.

Funding Statement

The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Naresh KN, Raphael M, Ayers L, Hurwitz N, Calbi V, Rogena E, et al. Lymphomas in sub—Saharan Africa–what can we learn and how can we help in improving diagnosis, managing patients and fostering translational research? British journal of haematology. 2011;154(6):696–703. 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2011.08772.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Tefera B, Assefa M, Abebe B, Rauch D. Patterns of Cancer in University of Gondar Hospital: North-West Ethiopia. Journal of Oncology Medicine and Practice. 2016;1(106). [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Organization WH. International Agency For Research on Cancer GLOBOCAN 2018: http://gco.iarc.fr/today/data/factsheets/populations/231-ethiopiafact-sheets.pdf. Accessed 21 September 2018. Lung Cancer. 2018.
  • 4.Zebrack BJ, Zeltzer LK, Whitton J, Mertens AC, Odom L, Berkow R, et al. Psychological outcomes in long-term survivors of childhood leukemia, Hodgkin’s disease, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. Pediatrics. 2002;110(1):42–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Balasubramaniam G, Saoba S, Sarade M, Pinjare S. Case-control study of risk factors for Non-Hodgkin lymphoma in Mumbai, India. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention. 2013;14(2):775–80. 10.7314/apjcp.2013.14.2.775 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Cerhan JR, Wallace RB, Lutz CT, Folsom AR, Thomas A S, Zheng W, et al. Medical history risk factors for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in older women. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1997;89(4):314–8. 10.1093/jnci/89.4.314 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Fabbro-Peray P, Daures J-P, Rossi J-F. Environmental risk factors for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a population-based case–control study in Languedoc-Roussillon, France. Cancer Causes & Control. 2001;12(3):201–12. 10.1023/a:1011274922701 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Hardell L, Eriksson M. A case–control study of non‐Hodgkin lymphoma and exposure to pesticides. Cancer. 1999;85(6):1353–60. 10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19990315)85:6&lt;1353::aid-cncr19&gt;3.0.co;2-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Frederiksen BL, Dalton SO, Osler M, Steding-Jessen M, de Nully Brown P. Socioeconomic position, treatment, and survival of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in Denmark–a nationwide study. British journal of cancer. 2012;106(5):988 10.1038/bjc.2012.3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Zhang Y, Dai Y, Zheng T, Ma S. Risk factors of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Expert opinion on medical diagnostics. 2011;5(6):539–50. 10.1517/17530059.2011.618185 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Luo D, Zhou T, Tao Y, Feng Y, Shen X, Mei S. Exposure to organochlorine pesticides and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Scientific reports. 2016;6:25768 10.1038/srep25768 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Bassig BA, Lan Q, Rothman N, Zhang Y, Zheng T. Current understanding of lifestyle and environmental factors and risk of non-hodgkin lymphoma: an epidemiological update. Journal of cancer epidemiology. 2012;2012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Skibola CF. Obesity, diet and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Biomarkers. 2007;16(3):392–5. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-1081 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Pan SY, Mao Y, Ugnat A-M. Physical activity, obesity, energy intake, and the risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a population-based case-control study. American journal of epidemiology. 2005;162(12):1162–73. 10.1093/aje/kwi342 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Mitri J, Castillo J, Pittas AG. Diabetes and risk of Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Diabetes care. 2008;31(12):2391–7. 10.2337/dc08-1034 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Yan Li

5 Aug 2020

PONE-D-20-14290

Determinants of Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma at Felegehiwot Specialized Hospital, North West Ethiopia : a case-control study

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Bantie,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

==============================

==============================

Please submit your revised manuscript by Sep 19 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Yan Li

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. We suggest you thoroughly copyedit your manuscript for language usage, spelling, and grammar. If you do not know anyone who can help you do this, you may wish to consider employing a professional scientific editing service.  

Whilst you may use any professional scientific editing service of your choice, PLOS has partnered with both American Journal Experts (AJE) and Editage to provide discounted services to PLOS authors. Both organizations have experience helping authors meet PLOS guidelines and can provide language editing, translation, manuscript formatting, and figure formatting to ensure your manuscript meets our submission guidelines. To take advantage of our partnership with AJE, visit the AJE website (http://learn.aje.com/plos/) for a 15% discount off AJE services. To take advantage of our partnership with Editage, visit the Editage website (www.editage.com) and enter referral code PLOSEDIT for a 15% discount off Editage services.  If the PLOS editorial team finds any language issues in text that either AJE or Editage has edited, the service provider will re-edit the text for free.

Upon resubmission, please provide the following:

  • The name of the colleague or the details of the professional service that edited your manuscript

  • A copy of your manuscript showing your changes by either highlighting them or using track changes (uploaded as a *supporting information* file)

  • A clean copy of the edited manuscript (uploaded as the new *manuscript* file)

3. Please include additional information regarding the survey or questionnaire used in the study and ensure that you have provided sufficient details that others could replicate the analyses. For instance, if you developed a questionnaire as part of this study and it is not under a copyright more restrictive than CC-BY, please include a copy, in both the original language and English, as Supporting Information. In addition, please include further details of the pre-testing of this tool, including the number of participants and where they were recruited from.

4. You indicated that you had ethical approval for your study. In your Methods section, please ensure you have also confirmed that your IRB waived the need for parental consent for minors aged 13-17 and how parental permission was determined. In the manuscript you state: "13-17 years old patients,’ assents secured solely from them with parental/guardian permission".

5.We note that you have indicated that data from this study are available upon request. PLOS only allows data to be available upon request if there are legal or ethical restrictions on sharing data publicly. For information on unacceptable data access restrictions, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-unacceptable-data-access-restrictions.

In your revised cover letter, please address the following prompts:

a) If there are ethical or legal restrictions on sharing a de-identified data set, please explain them in detail (e.g., data contain potentially identifying or sensitive patient information) and who has imposed them (e.g., an ethics committee). Please also provide contact information for a data access committee, ethics committee, or other institutional body to which data requests may be sent.

b) If there are no restrictions, please upload the minimal anonymized data set necessary to replicate your study findings as either Supporting Information files or to a stable, public repository and provide us with the relevant URLs, DOIs, or accession numbers. Please see http://www.bmj.com/content/340/bmj.c181.long for guidelines on how to de-identify and prepare clinical data for publication. For a list of acceptable repositories, please see http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/data-availability#loc-recommended-repositories.

We will update your Data Availability statement on your behalf to reflect the information you provide.

6. Your ethics statement must appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please also ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics section of your online submission will not be published alongside your manuscript.

Additional Editor Comments (if provided):

editor comments

Please have this manuscript edited by some professional proofreading company.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The authors desired to study epidemiologic risk factors for NHL in their hospital in West Ethiopia. The most provocative finding is the association of increased risk with chemical exposure. This remains an important global health questions.

Abstract: Many places where parallel structure is needed to clean up the grammar. Many other grammatical errors throughout.

p.3 Background: Eliminate the first three paragraphs. Not all statements are accurate or relevant. Many are too rudimentary for a scientific paper in a major journal.

Consider condensing to a letter to the editor.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2020 Dec 28;15(12):e0243561. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243561.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


5 Oct 2020

Dear reviewers and editors, good day to you all! We authors made extensive revisions and amendments as per your comments and guidance. We believe that the manuscript is easy to read and understand. The corrections are found in the clear and track changed manuscript. Thank you very much in advance.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Yan Li

24 Nov 2020

Determinants of Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma at Felegehiwot Specialized Hospital, North West Ethiopia : a case-control study

PONE-D-20-14290R1

Dear Dr. Bantie,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Yan Li

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #2: (No Response)

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #2: No

Acceptance letter

Yan Li

7 Dec 2020

PONE-D-20-14290R1

Determinants of Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma at Felegehiwot Specialized Hospital, North West Ethiopia: a case-control study

Dear Dr. Bantie:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Dr. Yan Li

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 File. English version questionnaire.

    (PDF)

    S2 File. SPSS data—with no identifiers.

    (SAV)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All the data can access from the manuscript.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES