Yuanyuan Liang1, Norma S Ketchum2, Phyllis J Goodman3, Eric A Klein4, Ian M Thompson5. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas; Department of Urology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas; Cancer Therapy & Research Center, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas; Center for Research to Advance Community Health, San Antonio, Texas; School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas. Electronic address: liangy@uthscsa.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas. 3. SWOG Statistical Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington. 4. Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, Ohio. 5. Department of Urology, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas; Cancer Therapy & Research Center, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We examine the role of body mass index in the assessment of prostate cancer risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 3,258 participants who underwent biopsy (including 1,902 men with a diagnosis of prostate cancer) were identified from the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial. The associations of body mass index with prostate cancer and high grade prostate cancer were examined using logistic regression, adjusting for age, race, body mass index adjusted prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination, family history of prostate cancer, biopsy history, prostate specific antigen velocity, and time between study entry and the last biopsy. The prediction models were compared with our previously developed body mass index adjusted Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial prostate cancer risk calculator. RESULTS:Of the study subjects 49.1% were overweight and 29.3% were obese. After adjustment, among men without a known family history of prostate cancer, increased body mass index was not associated with a higher risk of prostate cancer (per one-unit increase in logBMI OR 0.83, p=0.54) but was significantly associated with a higher risk of high grade prostate cancer (ie Gleason score 7 or greater prostate cancer) (OR 2.31, p=0.03). For men with a known family history of prostate cancer the risks of prostate cancer and high grade prostate cancer increased rapidly as body mass index increased (prostate cancer OR 3.73, p=0.02; high grade prostate cancer OR 7.95, p=0.002). The previously developed risk calculator generally underestimated the risks of prostate cancer and high grade prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS:Body mass index provided independently predictive information regarding the risks of prostate cancer and high grade prostate cancer after adjusting for other risk factors. Body mass index, especially in men with a known family history of prostate cancer, should be considered for inclusion in any clinical assessment of prostate cancer risk and recommendations regarding prostate biopsy.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: We examine the role of body mass index in the assessment of prostate cancer risk. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 3,258 participants who underwent biopsy (including 1,902 men with a diagnosis of prostate cancer) were identified from the Selenium and Vitamin ECancer Prevention Trial. The associations of body mass index with prostate cancer and high grade prostate cancer were examined using logistic regression, adjusting for age, race, body mass index adjusted prostate specific antigen, digital rectal examination, family history of prostate cancer, biopsy history, prostate specific antigen velocity, and time between study entry and the last biopsy. The prediction models were compared with our previously developed body mass index adjusted Prostate Cancer Prevention Trial prostate cancer risk calculator. RESULTS: Of the study subjects 49.1% were overweight and 29.3% were obese. After adjustment, among men without a known family history of prostate cancer, increased body mass index was not associated with a higher risk of prostate cancer (per one-unit increase in logBMI OR 0.83, p=0.54) but was significantly associated with a higher risk of high grade prostate cancer (ie Gleason score 7 or greater prostate cancer) (OR 2.31, p=0.03). For men with a known family history of prostate cancer the risks of prostate cancer and high grade prostate cancer increased rapidly as body mass index increased (prostate cancer OR 3.73, p=0.02; high grade prostate cancer OR 7.95, p=0.002). The previously developed risk calculator generally underestimated the risks of prostate cancer and high grade prostate cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Body mass index provided independently predictive information regarding the risks of prostate cancer and high grade prostate cancer after adjusting for other risk factors. Body mass index, especially in men with a known family history of prostate cancer, should be considered for inclusion in any clinical assessment of prostate cancer risk and recommendations regarding prostate biopsy.
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: Eduardo I Canto; Herb Singh; Shahrokh F Shariat; Dov Kadmon; Brian J Miles; Thomas M Wheeler; Kevin M Slawin Journal: J Urol Date: 2004-09 Impact factor: 7.450
Authors: Edward Giovannucci; Eric B Rimm; Yan Liu; Michael Leitzmann; Kana Wu; Meir J Stampfer; Walter C Willett Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2003-08-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: P Dimitropoulou; R M Martin; E L Turner; J A Lane; R Gilbert; M Davis; J L Donovan; F C Hamdy; D E Neal Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2011-01-25 Impact factor: 7.640