| Literature DB >> 28676103 |
Julie A Schmidt1, Georgina K Fensom2, Sabina Rinaldi3, Augustin Scalbert3, Paul N Appleby2, David Achaintre3, Audrey Gicquiau3, Marc J Gunter3,4, Pietro Ferrari3, Rudolf Kaaks5, Tilman Kühn5, Anna Floegel6, Heiner Boeing6, Antonia Trichopoulou7,8, Pagona Lagiou7,8,9, Eleutherios Anifantis7, Claudia Agnoli10, Domenico Palli11, Morena Trevisan12,13, Rosario Tumino14, H Bas Bueno-de-Mesquita4,15, Antonio Agudo16, Nerea Larrañaga17,18, Daniel Redondo-Sánchez18,19, Aurelio Barricarte18,20,21, José Maria Huerta18,22, J Ramón Quirós23, Nick Wareham24, Kay-Tee Khaw25, Aurora Perez-Cornago2, Mattias Johansson3, Amanda J Cross4, Konstantinos K Tsilidis4,26, Elio Riboli4, Timothy J Key2, Ruth C Travis2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known about how pre-diagnostic metabolites in blood relate to risk of prostate cancer. We aimed to investigate the prospective association between plasma metabolite concentrations and risk of prostate cancer overall, and by time to diagnosis and tumour characteristics, and risk of death from prostate cancer.Entities:
Keywords: Acylcarnitines; Amino acids; Biogenic amines; European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC); Glycerophospholipids; Hexose; Mass spectrometry; Metabolomics; Prospective study; Prostate cancer risk; Sphingolipids
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28676103 PMCID: PMC5497352 DOI: 10.1186/s12916-017-0885-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med ISSN: 1741-7015 Impact factor: 8.775
Characteristics of 1077 prostate cancer cases and 1077 controls
| Characteristic | Cases, | Controls, |
|---|---|---|
| Age at blood collection, years (SD) | 60.0 (7.1) | 60.0 (7.1) |
| Height, cm (SD)a | 171.7 (6.9) | 172.1 (7.1) |
| BMI, kg/m2 (SD)a | 26.8 (3.5) | 26.9 (3.5) |
| Smoking, | ||
| Never | 349 (33.0) | 307 (29.0) |
| Former | 467 (44.1) | 501 (47.3) |
| Current | 242 (22.9) | 252 (23.8) |
| Alcohol consumption, | ||
| < 10 g/day | 479 (44.8) | 480 (44.6) |
| 10–19 g/day | 199 (18.6) | 201 (18.7) |
| 20–40 g/day | 218 (20.4) | 221 (20.5) |
| ≥ 40 g/day | 174 (16.3) | 174 (16.2) |
| Physical activity, | ||
| Inactive | 292 (28.0) | 273 (26.0) |
| Moderately inactive | 328 (31.4) | 326 (31.1) |
| Moderately active | 242 (23.2) | 246 (23.5) |
| Active | 182 (17.4) | 204 (19.4) |
| Marital status, | ||
| Married or cohabiting | 718 (89.4) | 730 (90.2) |
| Not married or cohabiting | 85 (10.6) | 79 (9.8) |
| Educational attainment, | ||
| Primary or equivalent | 413 (41.1) | 425 (42.2) |
| Secondary | 369 (36.7) | 396 (39.4) |
| Degree | 223 (22.2) | 185 (18.4) |
| Cases only | ||
| Age at diagnosis, years (SD) | 66.9 (7.0) | – |
| Time to diagnosis, | ||
| < 2 years | 137 (12.7) | – |
| 2 to <4 years | 177 (16.4) | – |
| 4 to <6 years | 191 (17.7) | – |
| 6 to <8 years | 120 (11.1) | – |
| 8 to <10 years | 136 (12.6) | – |
| ≥ 10 years | 316 (29.3) | – |
| Year of diagnosis, median (range) | 2001 (1994-2008) | – |
| Grade, | ||
| Low-intermediate grade | 778 (86.3) | – |
| High grade | 124 (13.7) | – |
| Stage, | ||
| Localised | 456 (68.7) | – |
| Advanced | 208 (31.3) | – |
| Non-aggressive | 549 (82.7) | – |
| Aggressive | 115 (17.3) | – |
| Death from prostate cancer, | 127 (12.3) | – |
aUnknown values for some participants; the calculations of percentages exclude missing values
bTime between blood collection and diagnosis
cGleason score <8 or coded as well, moderately or poorly differentiated for low-intermediate grade and Gleason score ≥8 or coded as undifferentiated for high grade
dThe TNM system was used to categorise stages of prostate cancer; localised: ≤T2 and N0/x and M0, or coded as localised; advanced: T3–4 and/or N1–3 and/or M1, or coded as advanced; and aggressive: T4 and/or N1–3 and/or M1. All categories are not mutually exclusive, so numbers do not add up; percentages were calculated separately for localised and advanced, and for non-aggressive and aggressive
eDeath from prostate cancer (prostate cancer listed as the underlying cause of death on the death certificate) during follow-up; 144 died of prostate cancer, but 17 were excluded from further analysis as their matched control had died before them (n = 13) or vital status was not known for their control (n = 4)
Fig. 1Statistical significance of associations between metabolite concentrations and risk of overall prostate cancer. The analysis included 1077 matched case-control sets. Statistical significance was plotted as –log10(p values). The dashed line represents conventionally statistical significance at α = 0.05. Filled circles represent positive associations, and unfilled circles represent inverse associations. The p values were derived from a conditional logistic regression using log metabolite concentration as a continuous variable and adjusting for exact age (continuously), body mass index (fourths; unknown), smoking (never; past; current; unknown), alcohol intake (<10; 10–19; 20–39; ≥40 g of alcohol per day; unknown), education (primary or none; secondary; degree level; unknown) and marital status (married or cohabiting; not married or cohabiting; unknown)
Fig. 2Odds ratios for overall prostate cancer risk by concentration of selected metabolites. Metabolites with p for linear trend <0.1 were included in the figure; no associations were statistically significant after controlling the false discovery rate at α = 0.05 (Benjamini-Hochberg). Odds ratios for one standard deviation increase in metabolite concentrations, 95% confidence intervals and p values for linear trend were derived from a conditional logistic regression using log metabolite concentration divided by the standard deviation of log metabolite concentration as a continuous variable and adjusting for exact age (continuously), body mass index (fourths; unknown), smoking (never; past; current; unknown), alcohol intake (<10; 10–19; 20–39; ≥40 g of alcohol per day; unknown), education (primary or none; secondary; degree level; unknown) and marital status (married or cohabiting; not married or cohabiting; unknown)
Fig. 3Statistical significance of associations between metabolite concentrations and prostate cancer risk by time to diagnosis. a Five years or less between blood collection and diagnosis; n = 428 matched case-control sets. b More than 5 years between blood collection and diagnosis; n = 649 matched sets. Statistical significance was plotted as –log10(p values). The dashed and the dotted lines represent conventionally statistical significance and statistical significance after controlling the false discovery rate (Benjamini-Hochberg), respectively, both at α = 0.05. Filled circles represent positive associations, and unfilled circles represent inverse associations. The p values were derived from a conditional logistic regression using log metabolite concentration as a continuous variable and adjusting for exact age (continuously), body mass index (fourths; unknown), smoking (never; past; current; unknown), alcohol intake (<10; 10–19; 20–39; ≥40 g of alcohol per day; unknown), education (primary or none; secondary; degree level; unknown) and marital status (married or cohabiting; not married or cohabiting; unknown)
Fig. 4Odds ratios for high grade prostate cancer by concentration of selected metabolites. Tumours with Gleason score ≥8 or coded as undifferentiated were defined as high grade. Metabolites with p for linear trend <0.05 were included in the figure; no associations were statistically significant after controlling the false discovery rate at α = 0.05 (Benjamini-Hochberg). Odds ratios for one standard deviation increase in metabolite concentrations, 95% confidence intervals and p values for linear trend were derived from a conditional logistic regression using log metabolite concentration divided by the standard deviation of log metabolite concentration as a continuous variable and adjusting for exact age (continuously), body mass index (fourths; unknown), smoking (never; past; current; unknown), alcohol intake (<10; 10–19; 20–39; ≥40 g of alcohol per day; unknown), education (primary or none; secondary; degree level; unknown) and marital status (married or cohabiting; not married or cohabiting; unknown)
Fig. 5Odds ratios for advanced stage prostate cancer by concentration of selected metabolites. Advanced stage tumours were defined as T3–4 and/or N1–3 and/or M1, using the tumour-node-metastasis staging system. Metabolites with p for linear trend <0.05 were included in the figure, and values marked in boldface were statistically significant after allowing for multiple testing using a false discovery rate controlling procedure at α = 0.05 (Benjamini-Hochberg). Odds ratios for one standard deviation increase in metabolite concentrations, 95% confidence intervals and p values for linear trend were derived from a conditional logistic regression using log metabolite concentration divided by the standard deviation of log metabolite concentration as a continuous variable and adjusting for exact age (continuously), body mass index (fourths; unknown), smoking (never; past; current; unknown), alcohol intake (<10; 10–19; 20–39; ≥40 g of alcohol per day; unknown), education (primary or none; secondary; degree level; unknown) and marital status (married or cohabiting; not married or cohabiting; unknown)
Fig. 6Odds ratios for aggressive prostate cancer by concentration of selected metabolites. Aggressive tumours were defined as T4 and/or N1–3 and/or M1, using the tumour-node-metastasis staging system. Metabolites with p for linear trend <0.05 were included in the figure; no associations were statistically significant after controlling the false discovery rate at α = 0.05 (Benjamini-Hochberg). Odds ratios for one standard deviation increase in metabolite concentrations, 95% confidence intervals and p values for linear trend were derived from a conditional logistic regression using log metabolite concentration divided by the standard deviation of log metabolite concentration as a continuous variable and adjusting for exact age (continuously), body mass index (fourths; unknown), smoking (never; past; current; unknown), alcohol intake (<10; 10–19; 20–39; ≥40 g of alcohol per day; unknown), education (primary or none; secondary; degree level; unknown) and marital status (married or cohabiting; not married or cohabiting; unknown)
Fig. 7Odds ratios for death from prostate cancer by selected concentration of metabolites. Metabolites with p for linear trend <0.05 were included in the figure; no associations were statistically significant after controlling the false discovery rate at α = 0.05 (Benjamini-Hochberg). Odds ratios for one standard deviation increase in metabolite concentrations, 95% confidence intervals and p values for linear trend were derived from a conditional logistic regression using log metabolite concentration divided by the standard deviation of log metabolite concentration as a continuous variable and adjusting for exact age (continuously), body mass index (fourths; unknown), smoking (never; past; current; unknown), alcohol intake (<10; 10–19; 20–39; ≥40 g of alcohol per day; unknown), education (primary or none; secondary; degree level; unknown) and marital status (married or cohabiting; not married or cohabiting; unknown