03 May 2018 In Diabetes
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The purpose of the study is to examine and summarize studies reporting on the epidemiology, the risk of developing diabetes, and the cardiovascular effects on individuals with diabetes of different levels of alcohol consumption. RECENT FINDINGS: Men consume more alcohol than women in populations with and without diabetes. Light-to-moderate alcohol consumption decreases the incidence of diabetes in the majority of the studies, whereas heavy drinkers and binge drinkers are at increased risk for diabetes. Among people with diabetes, light-to-moderate alcohol consumption reduces risks of cardiovascular diseases and all-cause mortality. Alcohol consumption is less common among populations with diabetes compared to the general population. Moderate alcohol consumption reduces the risk of diabetes and, as in the general population, improves cardiovascular health in patients with diabetes. Type of alcoholic beverage, gender, and body mass index are factors that affect these outcomes
03 May 2018 In Cardiovascular System
BACKGROUND: Whilst high levels of alcohol consumption are known to be associated with atrial fibrillation (AF), it is unclear if any level of alcohol consumption can be recommended to prevent the onset of the condition. The aim of this review is to characterise the association between chronic alcohol intake and incident AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Electronic literature searches were undertaken using PubMed and Embase databases up to 1 February 2016 to identify studies examining the impact of alcohol on the risk of incident AF. Prospective studies reporting on at least three levels of alcohol intake and published in English were eligible for inclusion. Studies of a retrospective or case control design were excluded. The primary study outcome was development of incident AF. Consistent with previous studies, high levels of alcohol intake were associated with an increased incident AF risk (HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.20-1.49, p
03 May 2018 In Cancer
BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in the incidence of major cancers may be attributed to differences in the prevalence of established, modifiable risk factors such as obesity, smoking, physical activity and diet. METHODS: Data from a prospective cohort of 566,398 adults aged 50-71 years, 19,677 African-American and 450,623 Whites, was analyzed. Baseline data on cancer-related risk factors such as smoking, alcohol, physical activity and dietary patterns were used to create an individual adherence score. Differences in adherence by race, gender and geographic region were assessed using descriptive statistics, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the association between adherence and cancer incidence. RESULTS: Only 1.5% of study participants were adherent to all five cancer-related risk factor guidelines, with marked race-, gender- and regional differences in adherence overall. Compared with participants who were fully adherent to all five cancer risk factor criteria, those adherent to one or less had a 76% increased risk of any cancer incidence (HR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.70 - 1.82), 38% increased risk of breast cancer (HR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.25 - 1.52), and doubled the risk of colorectal cancer (HR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.84 - 2.29). However, risk of prostate cancer was lower among participants adherent to one or less compared with those who were fully adherent (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.75 - 0.85). The proportion of cancer incident cases attributable to low adherence was higher among African-Americans compared with Whites for all cancers (21% vs. 19%), and highest for colorectal cancer (25%) regardless of race. CONCLUSION: Racial differences in the proportion of cancer incidence attributable to low adherence suggests unique opportunities for targeted cancer prevention strategies that may help eliminate racial disparities in cancer burden among older US adults
03 May 2018 In Cancer
BACKGROUND: Racial disparities in the incidence of major cancers may be attributed to differences in the prevalence of established, modifiable risk factors such as obesity, smoking, physical activity and diet. METHODS: Data from a prospective cohort of 566,398 adults aged 50-71 years, 19,677 African-American and 450,623 Whites, was analyzed. Baseline data on cancer-related risk factors such as smoking, alcohol, physical activity and dietary patterns were used to create an individual adherence score. Differences in adherence by race, gender and geographic region were assessed using descriptive statistics, and Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the association between adherence and cancer incidence. RESULTS: Only 1.5% of study participants were adherent to all five cancer-related risk factor guidelines, with marked race-, gender- and regional differences in adherence overall. Compared with participants who were fully adherent to all five cancer risk factor criteria, those adherent to one or less had a 76% increased risk of any cancer incidence (HR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.70 - 1.82), 38% increased risk of breast cancer (HR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.25 - 1.52), and doubled the risk of colorectal cancer (HR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.84 - 2.29). However, risk of prostate cancer was lower among participants adherent to one or less compared with those who were fully adherent (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.75 - 0.85). The proportion of cancer incident cases attributable to low adherence was higher among African-Americans compared with Whites for all cancers (21% vs. 19%), and highest for colorectal cancer (25%) regardless of race. CONCLUSION: Racial differences in the proportion of cancer incidence attributable to low adherence suggests unique opportunities for targeted cancer prevention strategies that may help eliminate racial disparities in cancer burden among older US adults
Page 4 of 78

Contact us

We love your feedback. Get in touch with us.

  • Tel: +32 (0)2 230 99 70
  • Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Disclaimer

The authors have taken reasonable care in ensuring the accuracy of the information herein at the time of publication and are not responsible for any errors or omissions. Read more on our disclaimer and Privacy Policy.