Stephanie M Eick1, Catterina Ferreccio2, Johanna Acevedo2, Felicia Castriota3, José F Cordero1, Taehyun Roh4, Allan H Smith4, Martyn T Smith3, Craig Steinmaus5. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of Georgia College of Public Health, Athens, GA, United States. 2. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile, Advanced Center for Chronic Diseases, ACCDiS, Chile. 3. Division of Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States. 4. Arsenic Health Effects Research Program, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States. 5. Arsenic Health Effects Research Program, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley, CA, United States; Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, California Environmental Protection Agency, Oakland, CA, United States. Electronic address: craigs@berkeley.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate whether arsenic-related diabetes risks differ between people of low and high socioeconomic status (SES). METHODS: We used data collected between October 2007-December 2010 from a population-based cancer case-control study (N = 1301) in Northern Chile, an area with high arsenic water concentrations (>800 µg/L) and comprehensive records of past exposure. Information on lifetime exposure and potential confounders were obtained using structured interviews, questionnaires, and residential histories. Type 2 diabetes was defined as physician-diagnosed diabetes or oral hypoglycemic medication use. SES was measured using a 14-point scale based on ownership of household appliances, cars, internet access, or use of domestic help. Logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between arsenic and diabetes within strata of SES. RESULTS: Among those with low SES, the odds ratio (OR) for diabetes comparing individuals in the highest to lowest tertile of lifetime average arsenic exposure was 2.12 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-3.49, p = 0.004). However, those in the high SES group were not at increased risk (OR = 1.12 [95% CI = 0.72-1.73]). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide evidence that risks of arsenic-related diabetes may be higher in Chile in people with low versus high SES.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate whether arsenic-related diabetes risks differ between people of low and high socioeconomic status (SES). METHODS: We used data collected between October 2007-December 2010 from a population-based cancer case-control study (N = 1301) in Northern Chile, an area with high arsenic water concentrations (>800 µg/L) and comprehensive records of past exposure. Information on lifetime exposure and potential confounders were obtained using structured interviews, questionnaires, and residential histories. Type 2 diabetes was defined as physician-diagnosed diabetes or oral hypoglycemic medication use. SES was measured using a 14-point scale based on ownership of household appliances, cars, internet access, or use of domestic help. Logistic regression was used to assess the relationship between arsenic and diabetes within strata of SES. RESULTS: Among those with low SES, the odds ratio (OR) for diabetes comparing individuals in the highest to lowest tertile of lifetime average arsenic exposure was 2.12 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-3.49, p = 0.004). However, those in the high SES group were not at increased risk (OR = 1.12 [95% CI = 0.72-1.73]). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide evidence that risks of arsenic-related diabetes may be higher in Chile in people with low versus high SES.
Authors: A F Subar; F E Thompson; V Kipnis; D Midthune; P Hurwitz; S McNutt; A McIntosh; S Rosenfeld Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2001-12-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Craig M Steinmaus; Catterina Ferreccio; Johanna Acevedo Romo; Yan Yuan; Sandra Cortes; Guillermo Marshall; Lee E Moore; John R Balmes; Jane Liaw; Todd Golden; Allan H Smith Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2013-01-25 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Shrikant I Bangdiwala; Laurie Ramiro; Laura S Sadowski; Isabel A S Bordin; Wanda Hunter; Viswanathan Shankar Journal: Inj Control Saf Promot Date: 2004-06
Authors: Camilo G Sotomayor; Dion Groothof; Joppe J Vodegel; Tomás A Gacitúa; António W Gomes-Neto; Maryse C J Osté; Robert A Pol; Catterina Ferreccio; Stefan P Berger; Guillermo Chong; Riemer H J A Slart; Ramón Rodrigo; Gerjan J Navis; Daan J Touw; Stephan J L Bakker Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2020-02-03 Impact factor: 4.241
Authors: Sandra Cortés; Liliana Zúñiga-Venegas; Floria Pancetti; Alejandra Covarrubias; Muriel Ramírez-Santana; Héctor Adaros; Luis Muñoz Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-03 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Mohammad H Rahbar; Maureen Samms-Vaughan; Yuansong Zhao; Sepideh Saroukhani; Sheikh F Zaman; Jan Bressler; Manouchehr Hessabi; Megan L Grove; Sydonnie Shakspeare-Pellington; Katherine A Loveland Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-01-01 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Rodrigo X Armijos; M Margaret Weigel; Emmanuel Obeng-Gyasi; Marcia Racines-Orbe Journal: Int J Hyg Environ Health Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 7.401