Search

Background: Questions remain about the effect on mortality of physical activity and sedentary behaviour over time. We summarized the evidence from studies that assessed exposure from multiple time points and critiqued the analytic approaches used.Methods: A search was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, Emcare, Scopus and Web of Science up to January 2021 for studies of repeatedly assessed physical activity or sedentary behaviour in relation to all-cause or cause-specific mortality. Relative risks from individual studies were extracted. Each study was assessed for risk of bias from multiple domains.Results: We identified 64 eligible studies (57 on physical activity, 6 on sedentary behaviour, 1 on both). Cox regression with a time-fixed exposure history (n = 45) or time-varying covariates (n = 13) were the most frequently used methods. Only four studies used g-methods, which are designed to adjust for time-varying confounding. Risk of bias arose primarily from inadequate adjustment for time-varying confounders, participant selection, exposure classification and changes from measured exposure. Despite heterogeneity in methods, most studies found that being consistently or increasingly active over adulthood was associated with lower all-cause and cardiovascular-disease mortality compared with being always inactive. Few studies examined physical-activity changes and cancer mortality or effects of sedentary-behaviour changes on mortality outcomes.Conclusions: Accumulating more evidence using longitudinal data while addressing the methodological challenges would provide greater insight into the health effects of initiating or maintaining a more active and less sedentary lifestyle. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Five-year ovarian cancer survival rates are below 50%; there is considerable interest in whether common medications like statins may improve survival.Methods: We identified women diagnosed with ovarian cancer in Australia from 2003 to 2013 through the Australian Cancer Database and linked these records to national medication and death databases. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and confidence intervals (CI) for associations between statins and survival.Results: Pre-diagnosis statin use was not associated with survival overall but was associated with better survival among women with endometrioid cancers. Statin use after diagnosis was associated with better ovarian cancer-specific survival (OVS, HR = 0.87, 95%CI 0.81-0.94), but this association was largely restricted to women who started using statins after their cancer diagnosis (OVS HR = 0.68, 0.57-0.81 vs. HR = 0.94, 0.87-1.01 for continuing users). The association was strongest for endometrioid cancers (OVS HR = 0.48, 0.29-0.77).Conclusions: Use of statins may confer a survival benefit for women with ovarian cancer but it is impossible to rule out bias in observational studies. Particularly problematic are reverse causation where disease status affects statin use, confounding by indication and the absence of data for women with normal cholesterol levels. A randomised trial is required to provide definitive evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A recent paper suggested all women with endometrial cancer should take statins but it is unclear whether there is sufficient evidence to justify this recommendation. We identified all women diagnosed with uterine cancer in Australia between July 2003 and December 2013 (2012 in New South Wales) through the Australian Cancer Database (N = 16,501) and linked these to the national prescription database and National Death Index to identify statin use and survival outcomes to December 2015. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the associations between statin use and survival. Among the 15,703 women with endometrial cancer, pre-diagnosis statin use was not associated with survival. Endometrial cancer-specific mortality was lower among women who used statins after diagnosis (time-varying models: HR = 0.92; 95%CI 0.82–1.03) but the association was only seen among women with type 1 cancers (0.87; 0.76–1.00), for hydrophilic statins (0.84; 0.68–1.03) and for new use of statins after diagnosis (0.75; 0.59–0.95). There was a weak dose-response with increasing number of statin prescriptions. Sensitivity analyses using inverse probability of treatment weights were similar. Women with endometrial cancer who take statins after diagnosis may have better survival than those who do not use statins. However, it is impossible to completely rule out bias, particularly reverse causation where disease status may affect statin use. We believe it is too early to recommend all women with endometrial cancer take statins, but there is sufficient evidence to justify a randomized trial. • This national data-linkage study confirms a potential survival benefit for use of statins by women with endometrial cancer. • However, it is impossible to eliminate all bias, particularly reverse causation where disease status may affect statin use. • It is too early to recommend all women with endometrial cancer take statins, but a randomized trial is justified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Recent studies have called into question the long-held belief that hysterectomy without oophorectomy protects against ovarian cancer. This population-based longitudinal record-linkage study aimed to explore this relationship, overall and by age at hysterectomy, time period, surgery type, and indication for hysterectomy.Methods: We followed the female adult Western Australian population (837 942 women) across a 27-year period using linked electoral, hospital, births, deaths, and cancer records. Surgery dates were determined from hospital records, and ovarian cancer diagnoses (n = 1640) were ascertained from cancer registry records. We used Cox regression to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between hysterectomy and ovarian cancer incidence.Results: Hysterectomy without oophorectomy (n = 78 594) was not associated with risk of invasive ovarian cancer overall (HR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.85 to 1.11) or with the most common serous subtype (HR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.89 to 1.23). Estimates did not vary statistically significantly by age at procedure, time period, or surgical approach. However, among women with endometriosis (5.8%) or with fibroids (5.7%), hysterectomy was associated with substantially decreased ovarian cancer risk overall (HR = 0.17, 95% CI = 0.12 to 0.24, and HR = 0.27, 95% CI = 0.20 to 0.36, respectively) and across all subtypes.Conclusions: Our results suggest that for most women, having a hysterectomy with ovarian conservation is not likely to substantially alter their risk of developing ovarian cancer. However, our results, if confirmed, suggest that ovarian cancer risk reduction could be considered as a possible benefit of hysterectomy when making decisions about surgical management of endometriosis or fibroids. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Observational studies suggest greater height is associated with increased ovarian cancer risk, but cannot exclude bias and/or confounding as explanations for this. Mendelian randomisation (MR) can provide evidence which may be less prone to bias.Methods: We pooled data from 39 Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium studies (16,395 cases; 23,003 controls). We applied two-stage predictor-substitution MR, using a weighted genetic risk score combining 609 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Study-specific odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between genetically predicted height and risk were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.Results: Greater genetically predicted height was associated with increased ovarian cancer risk overall (pooled-OR (pOR) = 1.06; 95% CI: 1.01-1.11 per 5 cm increase in height), and separately for invasive (pOR = 1.06; 95% CI: 1.01-1.11) and borderline (pOR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.02-1.29) tumours.Conclusions: Women with a genetic propensity to being taller have increased risk of ovarian cancer. This suggests genes influencing height are involved in pathways promoting ovarian carcinogenesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Sedentary behaviours have been associated with increased risks of some common cancers in epidemiological studies; however, it is unclear if these associations are causal. Methods: We used univariable and multivariable two-sample Mendelian randomisation (MR) to examine potential causal relationships between sedentary behaviours and risks of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer. Genetic variants associated with self-reported leisure television watching and computer use were identified from a recent genome-wide association study (GWAS). Data related to cancer risk were obtained from cancer GWAS consortia. A series of sensitivity analyses were applied to examine the robustness of the results to the presence of confounding. Results: A 1-standard deviation (SD: 1.5h/day) increment in hours of television watching increased risk of breast cancer (OR per 1-SD: 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05–1.26) and colorectal cancer (OR per 1-SD: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.16– 1.49) while there was little evidence of an association for prostate cancer risk (OR per 1-SD: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.84–1.06). After adjusting for years of education, the effect estimates for television watching were attenuated (breast cancer, OR per 1-SD: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.92–1.27; colorectal cancer, OR per 1-SD: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.90–1.31). Post hoc analyses showed that years of education might have a possible confounding and mediating role in the association between television watching with breast and colorectal cancer. Consistent results were observed for each cancer site according to sex (colorectal cancer), anatomical subsites and cancer subtypes. There was little evidence of associations between genetically predicted computer use and cancer risk. Conclusions: Our univariable analysis identified some positive associations between hours of television watching and risks of breast and colorectal cancer. However, further adjustment for additional lifestyle factors especially years of education attenuated these results. Future studies using objective measures of exposure can provide new insights into the possible role of sedentary behaviour in cancer development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Observational studies suggest greater height is associated with increased ovarian cancer risk, but cannot exclude bias and/or confounding as explanations for this. Mendelian randomisation (MR) can provide evidence which may be less prone to bias.Methods: We pooled data from 39 Ovarian Cancer Association Consortium studies (16,395 cases; 23,003 controls). We applied two-stage predictor-substitution MR, using a weighted genetic risk score combining 609 single-nucleotide polymorphisms. Study-specific odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between genetically predicted height and risk were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis.Results: Greater genetically predicted height was associated with increased ovarian cancer risk overall (pooled-OR (pOR) = 1.06; 95% CI: 1.01-1.11 per 5 cm increase in height), and separately for invasive (pOR = 1.06; 95% CI: 1.01-1.11) and borderline (pOR = 1.15; 95% CI: 1.02-1.29) tumours.Conclusions: Women with a genetic propensity to being taller have increased risk of ovarian cancer. This suggests genes influencing height are involved in pathways promoting ovarian carcinogenesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined demographic and lifestyle risk factors for incidence of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) and Barrett's esophagus (BE) in an Australian cohort of 20,975 participants aged 40–63 at recruitment (1990–1994). Information on GERD and BE was collected between 2007 and 2010. GERD symptoms were defined as self-reported heartburn or acid regurgitation. BE was defined as endoscopically confirmed columnar-lined esophagus. Risk factors for developing GERD symptoms, BE diagnosis, age at symptom onset, and age at BE diagnosis were quantified using regression. During a mean follow-up of 15.8 years, risk of GERD symptoms was 7.5% (n  = 1,318) for daily, 7.5% (n  = 1,333) for 2–6 days/week, and 4.3% (n  = 751) for 1 day/week. There were 210 (1.0%) endoscopically diagnosed BE cases, of whom 141 had histologically confirmed esophageal intestinal metaplasia. Female sex, younger age, lower socioeconomic position (SEP) and educational attainment, and former smoking were associated with higher GERD risk. Male sex and smoking were associated with earlier GERD symptom onset. Men, older participants, those with higher SEP, and former smokers were at higher BE risk. There was some evidence higher SEP was associated with earlier BE diagnosis. GERD and BE had different demographic risk factors but shared similar lifestyle factors. Earlier GERD symptom onset for men and smokers might have contributed to higher BE risk. The SEP patterns observed for GERD and BE suggest potential inequity in access to care. These findings would be important in the development of clinical risk prediction models for early detection of BE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To examine associations between diet and risk of developing gastro-oesophageal reflux disease (GERD).Design: Prospective cohort with a median follow-up of 15·8 years. Baseline diet was measured using a FFQ. GERD was defined as self-reported current or history of daily heartburn or acid regurgitation beginning at least 2 years after baseline. Sex-specific logistic regressions were performed to estimate OR for GERD associated with diet quality scores and intakes of nutrients, food groups and individual foods and beverages. The effect of substituting saturated fat for monounsaturated or polyunsaturated fat on GERD risk was examined.Setting: Melbourne, Australia.Participants: A cohort of 20 926 participants (62 % women) aged 40-59 years at recruitment between 1990 and 1994.Results: For men, total fat intake was associated with increased risk of GERD (OR 1·05 per 5 g/d; 95 % CI 1·01, 1·09; P = 0·016), whereas total carbohydrate (OR 0·89 per 30 g/d; 95 % CI 0·82, 0·98; P = 0·010) and starch intakes (OR 0·84 per 30 g/d; 95 % CI 0·75, 0·94; P = 0·005) were associated with reduced risk. Nutrients were not associated with risk for women. For both sexes, substituting saturated fat for polyunsaturated or monounsaturated fat did not change risk. For both sexes, fish, chicken, cruciferous vegetables and carbonated beverages were associated with increased risk, whereas total fruit and citrus were associated with reduced risk. No association was observed with diet quality scores.Conclusions: Diet is a possible risk factor for GERD, but food considered as triggers of GERD symptoms might not necessarily contribute to disease development. Potential differential associations for men and women warrant further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]