| Title |
Consumption of sweet foods and breast cancer risk: a case–control study of women on Long Island, New York
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cancer Causes & Control, April 2009
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10552-009-9343-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Patrick T. Bradshaw, Sharon K. Sagiv, Geoffrey C. Kabat, Jessie A. Satia, Julie A. Britton, Susan L. Teitelbaum, Alfred I. Neugut, Marilie D. Gammon |
| Abstract |
Several epidemiologic studies have reported a positive association between breast cancer risk and high intake of sweets, which may be due to an insulin-related mechanism. We investigated this association in a population-based case-control study of 1,434 cases and 1,440 controls from Long Island, NY. Shortly after diagnosis, subjects were interviewed in-person to assess potential breast cancer risk factors, and self-completed a modified Block food frequency questionnaire, which included 11 items pertaining to consumption of sweets (sweet beverages, added sugars, and various desserts) in the previous year. Using unconditional logistic regression models, we estimated the association between consumption of sweets and breast cancer. Consumption of a food grouping that included dessert foods, sweet beverages, and added sugars was positively associated with breast cancer risk [adjusted odds ratio (OR) comparing the highest to the lowest quartile: 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00-1.61]. The OR was slightly higher when only dessert foods were considered (OR: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.23-1.96). The association with desserts was stronger among pre-menopausal women (OR: 2.00, 95% CI: 1.32-3.04) than post-menopausal women (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.07-1.83), although the interaction with menopause was not statistically significant. Our study indicates that frequent consumption of sweets, particularly desserts, may be associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. These results are consistent with other studies that implicate insulin-related factors in breast carcinogenesis. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 16% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 12% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 5 | 9% |
| Unknown | 18 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 12% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 5% |
| Chemical Engineering | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 August 2014.
All research outputs
#21,358,731
of 23,854,458 outputs
Outputs from Cancer Causes & Control
#1,984
of 2,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#91,950
of 95,704 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer Causes & Control
#18
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,854,458 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 95,704 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.