OBJECTIVES: Studies suggest obesity is associated with decreased prostate cancer risk. We hypothesized obesity is biologically associated with increased risk, although this is obscured owing to hemodilution of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and larger prostate size. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 441 consecutive men undergoing prostate biopsy between 1999 and 2003 at two equal access centers within the Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System. We estimated the association between obesity (body mass index >or= 30 kg/m(2)) and positive biopsy and Gleason >or=4+3 using logistic regression analysis adjusting for multiple clinical characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 123 men (28%) were obese and 149 men (34%) had cancer. Median PSA and age were 5.7 ng/mL and 63.9 years, respectively. Obese men had significantly lower PSA concentrations (P = .02) and larger prostate volumes (P = .04). Obesity was not significantly related to age (P = .19) or race (P = .37). On univariate analysis, obesity was not associated with prostate cancer risk (odds ratio [OR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-1.75, P = .58). However, after adjusting for multiple clinical characteristics, obesity was associated with significantly increased prostate cancer risk (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.17-3.32, P = .01). After multivariable adjustment, there was no significant association between obesity and high-grade disease (P = .18). CONCLUSIONS: Without adjustment for clinical characteristics, obesity was not significantly associated with prostate cancer risk in this equal-access, clinic-based population. However, after adjusting for the lower PSA levels and the larger prostate size, obesity was associated with a 98% increased prostate cancer risk. These findings support the fact that current prostate cancer screening practices may be biased against obese men.
OBJECTIVES: Studies suggest obesity is associated with decreased prostate cancer risk. We hypothesized obesity is biologically associated with increased risk, although this is obscured owing to hemodilution of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) and larger prostate size. METHODS: We retrospectively studied 441 consecutive men undergoing prostate biopsy between 1999 and 2003 at two equal access centers within the Veterans Affairs Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System. We estimated the association between obesity (body mass index >or= 30 kg/m(2)) and positive biopsy and Gleason >or=4+3 using logistic regression analysis adjusting for multiple clinical characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 123 men (28%) were obese and 149 men (34%) had cancer. Median PSA and age were 5.7 ng/mL and 63.9 years, respectively. Obesemen had significantly lower PSA concentrations (P = .02) and larger prostate volumes (P = .04). Obesity was not significantly related to age (P = .19) or race (P = .37). On univariate analysis, obesity was not associated with prostate cancer risk (odds ratio [OR] 1.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.73-1.75, P = .58). However, after adjusting for multiple clinical characteristics, obesity was associated with significantly increased prostate cancer risk (OR 1.98, 95% CI 1.17-3.32, P = .01). After multivariable adjustment, there was no significant association between obesity and high-grade disease (P = .18). CONCLUSIONS: Without adjustment for clinical characteristics, obesity was not significantly associated with prostate cancer risk in this equal-access, clinic-based population. However, after adjusting for the lower PSA levels and the larger prostate size, obesity was associated with a 98% increased prostate cancer risk. These findings support the fact that current prostate cancer screening practices may be biased against obesemen.
Authors: Stephen J Freedland; Kelly A Grubb; Sindy K Yiu; Elizabeth B Humphreys; Matthew E Nielsen; Leslie A Mangold; William B Isaacs; Alan W Partin Journal: J Urol Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Jacques Baillargeon; Brad H Pollock; Alan R Kristal; Patrick Bradshaw; Javier Hernandez; Joseph Basler; Betsy Higgins; Steve Lynch; Thomas Rozanski; Dean Troyer; Ian Thompson Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-03-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Marion A Gray; Brett Delahunt; Jefferson R Fowles; Philip Weinstein; Russell R Cookes; John N Nacey Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2004 May-Jun Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: Ian M Thompson; Phyllis J Goodman; Catherine M Tangen; M Scott Lucia; Gary J Miller; Leslie G Ford; Michael M Lieber; R Duane Cespedes; James N Atkins; Scott M Lippman; Susie M Carlin; Anne Ryan; Connie M Szczepanek; John J Crowley; Charles A Coltman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Christopher L Amling; Robert H Riffenburgh; Leon Sun; Judd W Moul; Raymond S Lance; Leo Kusuda; Wade J Sexton; Douglas W Soderdahl; Timothy F Donahue; John P Foley; Andrew K Chung; David G McLeod Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-12-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Stephen J Freedland; William J Aronson; Christopher J Kane; Joseph C Presti; Christopher L Amling; David Elashoff; Martha K Terris Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-12-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: D I Chu; C De Nunzio; L Gerber; J-A Thomas; E E Calloway; S Albisinni; C Senocak; M G McKeever; D M Moreira; A Tubaro; J W Moul; S J Freedland; L L Bañez Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2011-07-05 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: C De Nunzio; G Truscelli; A Trucchi; S Petta; M Tubaro; M Gacci; C Gaudio; F Presicce; A Tubaro Journal: Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis Date: 2015-10-06 Impact factor: 5.554
Authors: Marianne Schmid; Quoc-Dien Trinh; Markus Graefen; Margit Fisch; Felix K Chun; Jens Hansen Journal: World J Urol Date: 2014-05-14 Impact factor: 4.226