Skip to main content

Table 4 Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (in parentheses) of hepatocellular carcinoma per 1 unit increase in serum anti-LPS and anti-flagellin immunoglobulins from analyses stratified according to selected characteristics and sensitivity analyses, EPIC study, 1992–2010

From: Exposure to bacterial products lipopolysaccharide and flagellin and hepatocellular carcinoma: a nested case-control study

Model

Cases

Anti-LPS IgG + IgA

Anti-flagellin IgG + IgA

Anti-LPS IgG + anti-flagellin IgG

Anti-LPS IgA + anti-flagellin IgA

Anti-LPS IgG + IgA + anti-flagellin IgG + IgA

Stratified analyses

 By sex

  Men

98

5.12 (2.09–12.55)

5.58 (2.11–14.78)

4.93 (2.06–11.79)

2.34 (1.38–3.97)

2.65 (1.58–4.45)

  Women

41

1.61 (0.58–4.44)

1.54 (0.54–4.36)

1.21 (0.43–3.41)

1.71 (0.72–4.03)

1.34 (0.75–2.41)

   P interaction by sex

 

0.062

0.059

0.030

0.402

0.055

 Cases diagnosed

  >2 years since blood collection

117

2.75 (1.62–4.67)

2.04 (1.29–3.21)

2.35 (1.38–4.01)

2.05 (1.33–3.15)

1.68 (1.27–2.23)

  >4 years since blood collection

97

4.87 (2.18–10.89)

2.52 (1.4–4.54)

3.70 (1.64–8.34)

2.52 (1.47–4.33)

2.11 (1.41–3.15)

 By follow-up timea

   < 6 y since blood collection

65

2.45 (1.41–4.26)

2.17 (1.27–3.73)

2.43 (1.36–4.37)

1.89 (1.20–2.95)

1.67 (1.22–2.29)

   ≥ 6 y since blood collection

74

3.16 (1.65–6.06)

2.57 (1.42–4.64)

2.56 (1.38–4.77)

2.23 (1.36–3.63)

1.82 (1.30–2.56)

Sensitivity analyses

 All data, subset with data on HBV/HCV status

100

2.83 (1.61–4.99)

2.62 (1.43–4.81)

2.88 (1.61–5.15)

1.95 (1.24–3.06)

1.83 (1.32–2.55)

 Additionally adjusted for

  Liver damage scoreb

100

2.92 (1.02–8.40)

1.76 (0.83–3.72)

2.86 (1.03–7.92)

1.41 (0.75–2.64)

1.56 (0.96–2.51)

  HBV/HCV status and liver damage scoreb

100

3.35 (0.82–13.77)

1.66 (0.62–4.44)

2.35 (0.81–6.79)

1.33 (0.64–2.77)

1.60 (0.83–3.06)

  1. IRRs and 95% confidence intervals were estimated by conditional logistic regression conditioned on the matching factors and adjusted for smoking status (never, former, current), body mass index (continuous), baseline alcohol intake (continuous), coffee intake (continuous), lifetime alcohol drinking pattern (always heavy, periodically heavy, former heavy, never heavy, former light, light, and never drinker), physical activity (active, moderately active, moderately inactive, inactive), and level of education (none, primary school, secondary school, more than secondary school, not specified)
  2. aMean follow-up time among cases (6 years) was used as a cut-point
  3. bSubjects with liver damage score of 0 and 1 were considered to have normal liver function. Liver damage score ranges from 0 to 6, grouped in categories as 0, 1, ≥2 abnormal liver function tests based on the values provided by the laboratory: ALT >55 U/L, AST >34 U/L, GGT men >64 U/L, GGT women >36 U/L, AP >150 U/L, albumin <35 g/L, total bilirubin >1.2 mg/dL. Available for 100 cases and 100 controls