Search

Objectives: We investigated the Latino paradox in a managed care setting and examined the role of birthplace., Methods: We evaluated 133,155 non-Latino Whites and 5,237 Latinos (36% born in the United States, 34% in Central and South America, 21% in Mexico, and 8% in the Caribbean Islands) who were enrolled in an integrated healthcare delivery system in northern California. Baseline data were from 1964-1973, and the median followup was 34 years. Main outcome measures were cause-specific and all-cause mortality., Results: In fully-adjusted analyses, and compared with non-Latino Whites, the risk of death from circulatory causes was significantly lower among US-born Latinos (hazard ratio [HR] .79, 95% confidence interval [CI] .66-.93), among Central and South America-born Latinos (HR .76, 95% CI .63-.91), and Caribbean-born Latinos (HR .66, 95% CI .47-0.93). Risk of death by malignant neoplasms was significantly lower among US-born Latinos (HR .68, 95% CI .56-.83). Risk of respiratory death was significantly lower among Central and South America-born Latinos (HR .50, 95% CI .32-.80). All-cause mortality risk was significantly decreased in US-born Latinos (HR .79, 95% CI .71-.87), Central and South America-born Latinos (HR .81, 95% CI .73-.90), and Caribbean-born Latinos (HR .76, 95% CI .63-.93) but not in Mexico-born Latinos., Conclusions: In our managed care setting, the Latino paradox phenomenon varied by birthplace; it was more evident among US-born Latinos. This subgroup experienced lower circulatory, cancer, and all-cause mortality than did non-Latino Whites, despite higher prevalences of current smoking, obesity, and asymptomatic hyperglycemia.

U.S. Latinas have a lower incidence of breast cancer compared with non-Latina White women. This difference is partially explained by differences in the prevalence of known risk factors. Genetic factors may also contribute to this difference in incidence. Latinas are an admixed population with most of their genetic ancestry from Europeans and Indigenous Americans. We used genetic markers to estimate the ancestry of Latina breast cancer cases and controls and assessed the association with genetic ancestry, adjusting for reproductive and other risk factors. We typed a set of 106 ancestry informative markers in 440 Latina women with breast cancer and 597 Latina controls from the San Francisco Bay area and estimated genetic ancestry using a maximum likelihood method. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for ancestry modeled as a continuous variable were estimated using logistic regression with known risk factors included as covariates. Higher European ancestry was associated with increased breast cancer risk. The OR for a 25% increase in European ancestry was 1.79 (95% CI, 1.28-2.79; P<0.001). When known risk factors and place of birth were adjusted for, the association with European ancestry was attenuated but remained statistically significant (OR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.06-2.11; P=0.013). Further work is needed to determine if the association is due to genetic differences between populations or possibly due to environmental factors not measured.