Lindsay N Kohler1, Elizabeth A Hibler2, Robin B Harris1,3, Eyal Oren1, Denise J Roe1,3, Peter W Jurutka4,5, Elizabeth T Jacobs6,7,3. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, and. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. 3. University of Arizona Cancer Center, Tucson, AZ. 4. School of Mathematical and Natural Sciences, Arizona State University, Phoenix, AZ; and. 5. Department of Basic Medical Sciences, University of Arizona College of Medicine, Phoenix, AZ. 6. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, and jacobse@email.arizona.edu. 7. Department of Nutritional Sciences, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.
Abstract
Background: Several lifestyle factors targeted by the American Cancer Society (ACS) Nutrition and Physical Activity Cancer Prevention Guidelines are also associated with circulating concentrations of vitamin D metabolites. This suggests that greater adherence to the ACS guidelines may be related to better vitamin D status.Objective: We examined the relation between adherence to the ACS guidelines and circulating concentrations of 2 vitamin D metabolites, 25-hydroxycholecalciferol [25(OH)D] and 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D]. Methods: We conducted cross-sectional analyses of pooled participants from the Wheat Bran Fiber (n = 503) and Ursodeoxycholic Acid (n = 854) trials. A cumulative adherence score was constructed with the use of baseline data on body size, diet, physical activity, and alcohol consumption. Continuous vitamin D metabolite concentrations and clinically relevant categories were evaluated with the use of multiple linear and logistic regression models, respectively. Results: The most adherent participants were more likely to be older, white, and nonsmokers than were the least adherent. A statistically significant association was observed between guideline adherence and concentrations of circulating 25(OH)D (means ± SEs-high adherence: 32.0 ± 0.8 ng/mL; low adherence: 26.4 ± 0.7 ng/mL; P-trend < 0.001). For 1,25(OH)2D concentrations, high adherence was again significantly related to greater metabolite concentrations, with mean ± SE concentrations of 36.3 ± 1.3 pg/mL and 31.9 ± 1.0 pg/mL for high- and low-adherers, respectively (P-trend = 0.008). Furthermore, the odds of attaining a sufficient 25(OH)D status were 4.37 times higher for those most adherent than for those least adherent (95% CI: 2.47, 7.71 times). Conclusion: These findings demonstrate that greater adherence to the ACS guidelines is associated with higher circulating concentrations of both of 25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)2D.
Background: Several lifestyle factors targeted by the American Cancer Society (ACS) Nutrition and Physical Activity Cancer Prevention Guidelines are also associated with circulating concentrations of vitamin D metabolites. This suggests that greater adherence to the ACS guidelines may be related to better vitamin D status.Objective: We examined the relation between adherence to the ACS guidelines and circulating concentrations of 2 vitamin D metabolites, 25-hydroxycholecalciferol [25(OH)D] and 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D [1,25(OH)2D]. Methods: We conducted cross-sectional analyses of pooled participants from the Wheat Bran Fiber (n = 503) and Ursodeoxycholic Acid (n = 854) trials. A cumulative adherence score was constructed with the use of baseline data on body size, diet, physical activity, and alcohol consumption. Continuous vitamin D metabolite concentrations and clinically relevant categories were evaluated with the use of multiple linear and logistic regression models, respectively. Results: The most adherent participants were more likely to be older, white, and nonsmokers than were the least adherent. A statistically significant association was observed between guideline adherence and concentrations of circulating 25(OH)D (means ± SEs-high adherence: 32.0 ± 0.8 ng/mL; low adherence: 26.4 ± 0.7 ng/mL; P-trend < 0.001). For 1,25(OH)2D concentrations, high adherence was again significantly related to greater metabolite concentrations, with mean ± SE concentrations of 36.3 ± 1.3 pg/mL and 31.9 ± 1.0 pg/mL for high- and low-adherers, respectively (P-trend = 0.008). Furthermore, the odds of attaining a sufficient 25(OH)D status were 4.37 times higher for those most adherent than for those least adherent (95% CI: 2.47, 7.71 times). Conclusion: These findings demonstrate that greater adherence to the ACS guidelines is associated with higher circulating concentrations of both of 25(OH)D and 1,25(OH)2D.
Authors: John A Baron; Elizabeth L Barry; Leila A Mott; Judy R Rees; Robert S Sandler; Dale C Snover; Roberd M Bostick; Anastasia Ivanova; Bernard F Cole; Dennis J Ahnen; Gerald J Beck; Robert S Bresalier; Carol A Burke; Timothy R Church; Marcia Cruz-Correa; Jane C Figueiredo; Michael Goodman; Adam S Kim; Douglas J Robertson; Richard Rothstein; Aasma Shaukat; March E Seabrook; Robert W Summers Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-10-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David S Alberts; María Elena Martínez; Lisa M Hess; Janine G Einspahr; Sylvan B Green; A K Bhattacharyya; Jose Guillen; Mary Krutzsch; Ashok K Batta; Gerald Salen; Liane Fales; Kris Koonce; Dianne Parish; Mary Clouser; Denise Roe; Peter Lance Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2005-06-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Mark R Haussler; G Kerr Whitfield; Ichiro Kaneko; Carol A Haussler; David Hsieh; Jui-Cheng Hsieh; Peter W Jurutka Journal: Calcif Tissue Int Date: 2012-07-11 Impact factor: 4.333
Authors: Joan M Lappe; Dianne Travers-Gustafson; K Michael Davies; Robert R Recker; Robert P Heaney Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Peter F Schnatz; Xuezhi Jiang; Sharon Vila-Wright; Aaron K Aragaki; Matthew Nudy; David M O'Sullivan; Rebecca Jackson; Erin LeBlanc; Jennifer G Robinson; James M Shikany; Catherine R Womack; Lisa W Martin; Marian L Neuhouser; Mara Z Vitolins; Yiqing Song; Stephen Kritchevsky; JoAnn E Manson Journal: Menopause Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Erin L Van Blarigan; Charles S Fuchs; Donna Niedzwiecki; Sui Zhang; Leonard B Saltz; Robert J Mayer; Rex B Mowat; Renaud Whittom; Alexander Hantel; Al Benson; Daniel Atienza; Michael Messino; Hedy Kindler; Alan Venook; Shuji Ogino; Edward L Giovannucci; Kimmie Ng; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2018-06-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: Ellen M Santos; Jenna E Coalson; Elizabeth T Jacobs; Yann C Klimentidis; Stephen Munga; Maurice Agawo; Elizabeth Anderson; Nancy Stroupe; Kacey C Ernst Journal: Malar J Date: 2019-08-14 Impact factor: 2.979
Authors: Audrey Y Jung; Iva Miljkovic; Susan Rubin; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Heidi D Klepin; Anne B Newman; Jane Cauley; Hilsa Ayonayon; Tamara B Harris; Rachel A Murphy Journal: Nutrients Date: 2019-05-03 Impact factor: 5.717