Skip to main content
. 2021 Jul 22;114(5):1612–1624. doi: 10.1093/ajcn/nqab235

TABLE 5.

Joint associations of self-reported unrestrained eating and physical activity with digestive system cancer risk1

No and active2 No and Inactive2 Yes and Active2 Yes and Inactive2 P-interaction3
Joint associations according to eating anything at any time and physical activity
 All digestive system cancers
  Cases 529 978 131 426
  Multivariable4 1 [Reference] 1.12 (1.00, 1.24) 1.09 (0.90, 1.32) 1.41 (1.23, 1.61) 0.20
 Gastrointestinal tract cancers
  Cases 361 657 98 311
  Multivariable4 1 1.11 (0.97, 1.27) 1.20 (0.95, 1.50) 1.54 (1.31, 1.80) 0.27
 Colorectal cancer
  Cases 283 516 73 224
  Multivariable4 1 1.11 (0.96, 1.29) 1.17 (0.90, 1.52) 1.44 (1.20, 1.74) 0.51
Joint associations according to no concern with figure change and physical activity
 All digestive system cancers
  Cases 511 762 195 613
  Multivariable4 1 1.06 (0.95, 1.19) 0.97 (0.82, 1.15) 1.20 (1.06, 1.36) 0.14
 Gastrointestinal tract cancers
  Cases 362 535 134 424
  Multivariable4 1 1.06 (0.93, 1.22) 0.95 (0.78, 1.16) 1.19 (1.03, 1.39) 0.17
 Colorectal cancer
  Cases 280 416 107 329
  Multivariable4 1 1.08 (0.92, 1.26) 1.00 (0.80, 1.25) 1.23 (1.04, 1.46) 0.32
Joint associations according to eating anything at any time + no concern with figure change and physical activity
 All digestive system cancers
  Cases 391 584 61 232
  Multivariable4 1 1.09 (0.95, 1.24) 1.09 (0.83, 1.44) 1.44 (1.20, 1.71) 0.23
 Gastrointestinal tract cancers
  Cases 277 398 50 172
  Multivariable4 1 1.05 (0.90, 1.23) 1.30 (0.96, 1.77) 1.57 (1.28, 1.93) 0.44
 Colorectal cancer
  Cases 218 308 41 125
  Multivariable4 1 1.04 (0.87, 1.24) 1.43 (1.01, 2.01) 1.51 (1.19, 1.91) 0.95
1

Data are expressed as HRs and 95% CIs or numbers of cases unless otherwise indicated. MET, metabolic equivalent task; NHS, Nurses’ Health Study.

2

Self-reported behavior of unrestrained eating was dichotomized into a “no” category compared with a “yes” category, physical activity was dichotomized into an “active” category (≥18 MET-h/wk) compared with an “inactive” category (<18 MET-h/wk), resulting in 4 categories (no and active, no and inactive, yes and active, and yes and inactive, i.e., not having this behavior and being physically active, not having this behavior and being physically inactive, having this behavior and being physically active, and having this behavior and being physically inactive).

3

P value for interaction was calculated using the multiplication of status of having this behavior (0 for “no” and 1 for “yes”) and physical activity (0 for “active” and 1 for “inactive”).

4

HRs and 95% CIs were generated by Cox proportional hazards analyses adjusted for the same sets of covariates as denoted in Table 2.