4.3 Article

Glycemic index, carbohydrate and fiber intakes and risk of reflux esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma

期刊

CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL
卷 20, 期 3, 页码 279-288

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10552-008-9242-6

关键词

Dietary carbohydrates; Glycemic index; Esophageal adenocarcinoma; Reflux esophagitis; Barrett's esophagus

资金

  1. ESRC [ES/G007438/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Economic and Social Research Council [ES/G007438/1] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To examine the association between dietary glycemic index (GI), glycemic load (GL), total carbohydrate, sugars, starch, and fiber intakes and the risk of reflux esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, and esophageal adenocarcinoma. In an all-Ireland study, dietary information was collected from patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma (n = 224), long-segment Barrett's esophagus (n = 220), reflux esophagitis (n = 219), and population-based controls (n = 256). Multiple logistic regression analysis examined the association between dietary variables and disease risk by tertiles of intake and as continuous variables, while adjusting for potential confounders. Reflux esophagitis risk was positively associated with starch intake and negatively associated with sugar intake. Barrett's esophagus risk was significantly reduced in people in the highest versus the lowest tertile of fiber intake (OR 0.44 95%CI 0.25-0.80). Fiber intake was also associated with a reduced risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma, as was total carbohydrate intake (OR 0.45 95%CI 0.33-0.61 per 50 g/d increase). However, an increased esophageal adenocarcinoma risk was detected per 10 unit increase in GI intake (OR 1.42 95%CI 1.07-1.89). Our findings suggest that fiber intake is inversely associated with Barrett's esophagus and esophageal adenocarcinoma risk. Esophageal adenocarcinoma risk is inversely associated with total carbohydrate consumption but positively associated with high GI intakes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据