Nutrients, Vol. 17, Pages 679: Oxidative Balance Score Calculated Using Different Methods and Its Associations with Colorectal Cancer Risk
Nutrients doi: 10.3390/nu17040679
Authors:
Fangting Lin
Ruolin Zhou
Qingjian Ou
Kexin Tu
Yujing Fang
Caixia Zhang
Background: The oxidative balance score (OBS) measures oxidative stress from diet and lifestyle, but research linking it to colorectal cancer (CRC) risk is scarce and varies in calculation methods. Methods: We conducted a case-control study in Guangzhou, China, involving 2799 CRC cases and an equal number of sex- and age-matched controls. We adopted and compared four different methods for calculating the OBSs. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) for the relationship between OBS and CRC risk were determined using an unconditional logistic regression model. Restricted cubic splines were used to explore potential non-linear relationships. Additionally, stratified analyses were performed by sex, and subgroup analyses were performed based on the tumor site. Results: Among the four OBSs assessed, OBS-1 demonstrated superior performance. Higher adherence to four OBSs was associated with a lower risk of CRC. The adjusted ORs (95%CIs) for the highest quartile compared to the lowest quartile were as follows: 0.42 (0.35, 0.50) for OBS-1, 0.43 (0.36, 0.51) for OBS-2, 0.50 (0.42, 0.59) for OBS-3, and 0.43 (0.36, 0.51) for OBS-4. Linear relationships were observed between four OBSs and CRC risk (all p-Nonlinear > 0.05). Stratified analysis by sex revealed that all four OBSs were negatively associated with CRC risk in both male and female patients. Subgroup analysis by cancer site indicated that four OBSs were negatively associated with the risk of both colon and rectal cancer. Conclusions: All four OBSs were negatively associated with CRC risk, with OBS-1 showing the strongest association in our analysis.
Background: The oxidative balance score (OBS) measures oxidative stress from diet and lifestyle, but research linking it to colorectal cancer (CRC) risk is scarce and varies in calculation methods. Methods: We conducted a case-control study in Guangzhou, China, involving 2799 CRC cases and an equal number of sex- and age-matched controls. We adopted and compared four different methods for calculating the OBSs. The odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) for the relationship between OBS and CRC risk were determined using an unconditional logistic regression model. Restricted cubic splines were used to explore potential non-linear relationships. Additionally, stratified analyses were performed by sex, and subgroup analyses were performed based on the tumor site. Results: Among the four OBSs assessed, OBS-1 demonstrated superior performance. Higher adherence to four OBSs was associated with a lower risk of CRC. The adjusted ORs (95%CIs) for the highest quartile compared to the lowest quartile were as follows: 0.42 (0.35, 0.50) for OBS-1, 0.43 (0.36, 0.51) for OBS-2, 0.50 (0.42, 0.59) for OBS-3, and 0.43 (0.36, 0.51) for OBS-4. Linear relationships were observed between four OBSs and CRC risk (all p-Nonlinear > 0.05). Stratified analysis by sex revealed that all four OBSs were negatively associated with CRC risk in both male and female patients. Subgroup analysis by cancer site indicated that four OBSs were negatively associated with the risk of both colon and rectal cancer. Conclusions: All four OBSs were negatively associated with CRC risk, with OBS-1 showing the strongest association in our analysis. Read More