Person:

Lagiou, Pagona

Background: Obesity is positively associated with colorectal cancer. Recently, body size subtypes categorised by the prevalence of hyperinsulinaemia have been defined, and metabolically healthy overweight/obese individuals (without hyperinsulinaemia) have been suggested to be at lower risk of cardiovascular disease than their metabolically unhealthy (hyperinsulinaemic) overweight/obese counterparts. Whether similarly variable relationships exist for metabolically defined body size phenotypes and colorectal cancer risk is unknown. Methods and Findings: The association of metabolically defined body size phenotypes with colorectal cancer was investigated in a case–control study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study. Metabolic health/body size phenotypes were defined according to hyperinsulinaemia status using serum concentrations of C-peptide, a marker of insulin secretion. A total of 737 incident colorectal cancer cases and 737 matched controls were divided into tertiles based on the distribution of C-peptide concentration amongst the control population, and participants were classified as metabolically healthy if below the first tertile of C-peptide and metabolically unhealthy if above the first tertile. These metabolic health definitions were then combined with body mass index (BMI) measurements to create four metabolic health/body size phenotype categories: (1) metabolically healthy/normal weight (BMI < 25 kg/m2), (2) metabolically healthy/overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2), (3) metabolically unhealthy/normal weight (BMI < 25 kg/m2), and (4) metabolically unhealthy/overweight (BMI ≥ 25 kg/m2). Additionally, in separate models, waist circumference measurements (using the International Diabetes Federation cut-points [≥80 cm for women and ≥94 cm for men]) were used (instead of BMI) to create the four metabolic health/body size phenotype categories. Statistical tests used in the analysis were all two-sided, and a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. In multivariable-adjusted conditional logistic regression models with BMI used to define adiposity, compared with metabolically healthy/normal weight individuals, we observed a higher colorectal cancer risk among metabolically unhealthy/normal weight (odds ratio [OR] = 1.59, 95% CI 1.10–2.28) and metabolically unhealthy/overweight (OR = 1.40, 95% CI 1.01–1.94) participants, but not among metabolically healthy/overweight individuals (OR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.65–1.42). Among the overweight individuals, lower colorectal cancer risk was observed for metabolically healthy/overweight individuals compared with metabolically unhealthy/overweight individuals (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.49–0.96). These associations were generally consistent when waist circumference was used as the measure of adiposity. To our knowledge, there is no universally accepted clinical definition for using C-peptide level as an indication of hyperinsulinaemia. Therefore, a possible limitation of our analysis was that the classification of individuals as being hyperinsulinaemic—based on their C-peptide level—was arbitrary. However, when we used quartiles or the median of C-peptide, instead of tertiles, as the cut-point of hyperinsulinaemia, a similar pattern of associations was observed. Conclusions: These results support the idea that individuals with the metabolically healthy/overweight phenotype (with normal insulin levels) are at lower colorectal cancer risk than those with hyperinsulinaemia. The combination of anthropometric measures with metabolic parameters, such as C-peptide, may be useful for defining strata of the population at greater risk of colorectal cancer.

Background: In addition to HPV, high parity and hormonal contraceptives have been associated with cervical cancer (CC). However, most of the evidence comes from retrospective case-control studies. The aim of this study is to prospectively evaluate associations between hormonal factors and risk of developing cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 3 (CIN3)/carcinoma in situ (CIS) and invasive cervical cancer (ICC). Methods and Findings: We followed a cohort of 308,036 women recruited in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) Study. At enrollment, participants completed a questionnaire and provided serum. After a 9-year median follow-up, 261 ICC and 804 CIN3/CIS cases were reported. In a nested case-control study, the sera from 609 cases and 1,218 matched controls were tested for L1 antibodies against HPV types 11,16,18,31,33,35,45,52,58, and antibodies against Chlamydia trachomatis and Human herpesvirus 2. Multivariate analyses were performed to estimate hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). The cohort analysis showed that number of full-term pregnancies was positively associated with CIN3/CIS risk (p-trend = 0.03). Duration of oral contraceptives use was associated with a significantly increased risk of both CIN3/CIS and ICC (HR = 1.6 and HR = 1.8 respectively for ≥15 years versus never use). Ever use of menopausal hormone therapy was associated with a reduced risk of ICC (HR = 0.5, 95%CI: 0.4–0.8). A non-significant reduced risk of ICC with ever use of intrauterine devices (IUD) was found in the nested case-control analysis (OR = 0.6). Analyses restricted to all cases and HPV seropositive controls yielded similar results, revealing a significant inverse association with IUD for combined CIN3/CIS and ICC (OR = 0.7). Conclusions: Even though HPV is the necessary cause of CC, our results suggest that several hormonal factors are risk factors for cervical carcinogenesis. Adherence to current cervical cancer screening guidelines should minimize the increased risk of CC associated with these hormonal risk factors.