OBJECTIVE: We sought to quantify the relationship of uterine malignancy with body mass index (BMI). STUDY DESIGN: The University HealthSystem Consortium database was queried to identify all women undergoing total hysterectomy with a recorded BMI in the overweight and obese categories. Least squares regression was applied to evaluate the association between increasing BMI and the proportion of women with a diagnosis of uterine malignancy. Multivariate binary logistic regression was performed to adjust for other known risk factors including age, race, and other comorbidities. RESULTS: There were 6905 women who met inclusion criteria; 1891 (27.4%) of these had uterine malignancy. There is a linear relationship (y = 0.015x - 0.23, R(2) = 0.92) of the probability of uterine malignancy vs BMI. After adjusting for other risk factors, we found that each 1-U increase in BMI was significantly, independently associated with an 11% increase in the proportion of patients diagnosed with uterine malignancy (odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.13; P < .001). CONCLUSION: In a population of women undergoing hysterectomy, we observed a linear increase in the frequency of uterine cancer associated with increasing BMI. This finding suggests that even relatively modest weight gain may significantly raise cancer risk. In the United States, the mean BMI for women is 26.5 kg/m(2) and it is estimated that more than half of US women have a BMI within the study's range. Our results could, therefore, be relevant to a majority of the population. The findings could increase popular acceptance of weight management as a key component of general health maintenance and, possibly, as an additional approach to cancer risk reduction.
OBJECTIVE: We sought to quantify the relationship of uterine malignancy with body mass index (BMI). STUDY DESIGN: The University HealthSystem Consortium database was queried to identify all women undergoing total hysterectomy with a recorded BMI in the overweight and obese categories. Least squares regression was applied to evaluate the association between increasing BMI and the proportion of women with a diagnosis of uterine malignancy. Multivariate binary logistic regression was performed to adjust for other known risk factors including age, race, and other comorbidities. RESULTS: There were 6905 women who met inclusion criteria; 1891 (27.4%) of these had uterine malignancy. There is a linear relationship (y = 0.015x - 0.23, R(2) = 0.92) of the probability of uterine malignancy vs BMI. After adjusting for other risk factors, we found that each 1-U increase in BMI was significantly, independently associated with an 11% increase in the proportion of patients diagnosed with uterine malignancy (odds ratio, 1.11; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.13; P < .001). CONCLUSION: In a population of women undergoing hysterectomy, we observed a linear increase in the frequency of uterine cancer associated with increasing BMI. This finding suggests that even relatively modest weight gain may significantly raise cancer risk. In the United States, the mean BMI for women is 26.5 kg/m(2) and it is estimated that more than half of US women have a BMI within the study's range. Our results could, therefore, be relevant to a majority of the population. The findings could increase popular acceptance of weight management as a key component of general health maintenance and, possibly, as an additional approach to cancer risk reduction.
Authors: Laura R Daily; Jonathan D Boone; Hannah C Machemehl; Eric D Thomas; Gerald McGwin; J Michael Straughn; Charles A Leath Journal: Int J Gynecol Cancer Date: 2017-05 Impact factor: 3.437
Authors: Shannon D Armbruster; Jaejoon Song; Andrea Bradford; Cindy L Carmack; Karen H Lu; Karen M Basen-Engquist Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2016-09-24 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Andrea Ciavattini; Jacopo DI Giuseppe; Nicolò Clemente; Lorenzo Moriconi; Giovanni Delli Carpini; Nina Montik; Laura Mazzanti Journal: Oncol Lett Date: 2016-02-04 Impact factor: 2.967
Authors: Todd R Sponholtz; Julie R Palmer; Lynn Rosenberg; Elizabeth E Hatch; Lucile L Adams-Campbell; Lauren A Wise Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2016-01-27 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Günter Emons; Eric Steiner; Dirk Vordermark; Christoph Uleer; Nina Bock; Kerstin Paradies; Olaf Ortmann; Stefan Aretz; Peter Mallmann; Christian Kurzeder; Volker Hagen; Birgitt van Oorschot; Stefan Höcht; Petra Feyer; Gerlinde Egerer; Michael Friedrich; Wolfgang Cremer; Franz-Josef Prott; Lars-Christian Horn; Heinrich Prömpeler; Jan Langrehr; Steffen Leinung; Matthias W Beckmann; Rainer Kimmig; Anne Letsch; Michael Reinhardt; Bernd Alt-Epping; Ludwig Kiesel; Jan Menke; Marion Gebhardt; Verena Steinke-Lange; Nils Rahner; Werner Lichtenegger; Alain Zeimet; Volker Hanf; Joachim Weis; Michael Mueller; Ulla Henscher; Rita K Schmutzler; Alfons Meindl; Felix Hilpert; Joan Elisabeth Panke; Vratislav Strnad; Christiane Niehues; Timm Dauelsberg; Peter Niehoff; Doris Mayr; Dieter Grab; Michael Kreißl; Ralf Witteler; Annemarie Schorsch; Alexander Mustea; Edgar Petru; Jutta Hübner; Anne Derke Rose; Edward Wight; Reina Tholen; Gerd J Bauerschmitz; Markus Fleisch; Ingolf Juhasz-Boess; Lax Sigurd; Ingo Runnebaum; Clemens Tempfer; Monika J Nothacker; Susanne Blödt; Markus Follmann; Thomas Langer; Heike Raatz; Simone Wesselmann; Saskia Erdogan Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2018-10-19 Impact factor: 2.915