Billy A Caceres1,2, Veronica Barcelona2, Danny Vo3, Niurka Suero-Tejeda1, Kasey Jackman1, Jacquelyn Taylor1,2, Elizabeth Corwin4. 1. Precision in Symptom Self-Management Center, 5798Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, USA. 2. Center for Research on People of Color, 5798Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, USA. 3. 5798Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA. 4. 15760Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Discrimination is associated with negative health outcomes among Latinos. Research on the link between discrimination and inflammation in adults has focused on pro-inflammatory markers rather than characterizing the more informative balance of pro- and anti-inflammatory markers. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to examine the associations of everyday discrimination with inflammation ratio (defined as the ratio of pro- to anti-inflammatory cytokines) in a sample of middle-aged and older Latinas. METHODS: Latinas were recruited from an existing study in New York City. Participants reported frequency and count of everyday discrimination. Peripheral blood was used to analyze pro- (IL-1B and IL-6) and anti-inflammatory (IL-4 and IL-10) cytokines. The inflammation ratio was calculated by dividing the sum of pro-inflammatory cytokines by the sum of anti-inflammatory cytokines. We used linear regression to assess the link between everyday discrimination and inflammation ratio. RESULTS: The final sample included 40 Latinas (mean age = 63.2 years). Approximately 68% had household incomes less than $15,000. More than half (53%) reported experiencing some form of everyday discrimination. Regression models showed everyday discrimination was not associated with individual pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines. In adjusted regression models, the frequency of everyday discrimination was not associated with inflammation ratios (B[SE] = 0.57[0.30], p = .07). However, a higher count of everyday discrimination was associated with inflammation ratios (B[SE] = 1.15[0.55], p = .04). CONCLUSIONS: The count of everyday discrimination was positively associated with inflammation in Latina women. Future studies should replicate these findings using longitudinal assessment of discrimination and inflammatory markers.
INTRODUCTION: Discrimination is associated with negative health outcomes among Latinos. Research on the link between discrimination and inflammation in adults has focused on pro-inflammatory markers rather than characterizing the more informative balance of pro- and anti-inflammatory markers. The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to examine the associations of everyday discrimination with inflammation ratio (defined as the ratio of pro- to anti-inflammatory cytokines) in a sample of middle-aged and older Latinas. METHODS: Latinas were recruited from an existing study in New York City. Participants reported frequency and count of everyday discrimination. Peripheral blood was used to analyze pro- (IL-1B and IL-6) and anti-inflammatory (IL-4 and IL-10) cytokines. The inflammation ratio was calculated by dividing the sum of pro-inflammatory cytokines by the sum of anti-inflammatory cytokines. We used linear regression to assess the link between everyday discrimination and inflammation ratio. RESULTS: The final sample included 40 Latinas (mean age = 63.2 years). Approximately 68% had household incomes less than $15,000. More than half (53%) reported experiencing some form of everyday discrimination. Regression models showed everyday discrimination was not associated with individual pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines. In adjusted regression models, the frequency of everyday discrimination was not associated with inflammation ratios (B[SE] = 0.57[0.30], p = .07). However, a higher count of everyday discrimination was associated with inflammation ratios (B[SE] = 1.15[0.55], p = .04). CONCLUSIONS: The count of everyday discrimination was positively associated with inflammation in Latina women. Future studies should replicate these findings using longitudinal assessment of discrimination and inflammatory markers.
Authors: Donald M Lloyd-Jones; Yuling Hong; Darwin Labarthe; Dariush Mozaffarian; Lawrence J Appel; Linda Van Horn; Kurt Greenlund; Stephen Daniels; Graham Nichol; Gordon F Tomaselli; Donna K Arnett; Gregg C Fonarow; P Michael Ho; Michael S Lauer; Frederick A Masoudi; Rose Marie Robertson; Véronique Roger; Lee H Schwamm; Paul Sorlie; Clyde W Yancy; Wayne D Rosamond Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-01-20 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Hudson P Santos; Benjamin C Nephew; Arjun Bhattacharya; Xianming Tan; Laura Smith; Reema Abdulrahman S Alyamani; Elizabeth M Martin; Krista Perreira; Rebecca C Fry; Christopher Murgatroyd Journal: Psychoneuroendocrinology Date: 2018-08-16 Impact factor: 4.905
Authors: Angie Denisse Otiniano Verissimo; Gilbert C Gee; Martin Y Iguchi; Chandra L Ford; Samuel R Friedman Journal: Int J Drug Policy Date: 2013-03-06
Authors: Christopher M Callahan; Frederick W Unverzagt; Siu L Hui; Anthony J Perkins; Hugh C Hendrie Journal: Med Care Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 2.983