Ultra-processed foods, adiposity and risk of head and neck cancer and oesophageal adenocarcinoma in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study: a mediation analysis.

PURPOSE: To investigate the role of adiposity in the associations between ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption and head and neck cancer (HNC) and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. METHODS: Our study included 450,111 EPIC participants. We used Cox regressions to investigate the associations between the consumption of UPFs and HNC and OAC risk. A mediation analysis was performed to assess the role of body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) in these associations. In sensitivity analyses, we investigated accidental death as a negative control outcome. RESULTS: During a mean follow-up of 14.13 ± 3.98 years, 910 and 215 participants developed HNC and OAC, respectively. A 10% g/d higher consumption of UPFs was associated with an increased risk of HNC (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14-1.34) and OAC (HR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.47). WHR mediated 5% (95% CI 3-10%) of the association between the consumption of UPFs and HNC risk, while BMI and WHR, respectively, mediated 13% (95% CI 6-53%) and 15% (95% CI 8-72%) of the association between the consumption of UPFs and OAC risk. UPF consumption was positively associated with accidental death in the negative control analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We reaffirmed that higher UPF consumption is associated with greater risk of HNC and OAC in EPIC. The proportion mediated via adiposity was small. Further research is required to investigate other mechanisms that may be at play (if there is indeed any causal effect of UPF consumption on these cancers).

Time-sensitive testing pressures and COVID-19 outcomes: are socioeconomic inequalities over the first year of the pandemic explained by selection bias?

BACKGROUND: There are many ways in which selection bias might impact COVID-19 research. Here we focus on selection for receiving a polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) SARS-CoV-2 test and how known changes to selection pressures over time may bias research into COVID-19 infection. METHODS: Using UK Biobank (N = 420,231; 55% female; mean age = 66.8 [SD = 8·11]) we estimate the association between socio-economic position (SEP) and (i) being tested for SARS-CoV-2 infection versus not being tested (ii) testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection versus testing negative and (iii) testing negative for SARS-CoV-2 infection versus not being tested. We construct four distinct time-periods between March 2020 and March 2021, representing distinct periods of testing pressures and lockdown restrictions and specify both time-stratified and combined models for each outcome. We explore potential selection bias by examining associations with positive and negative control exposures. RESULTS: The association between more disadvantaged SEP and receiving a SARS-CoV-2 test attenuated over time. Compared to individuals with a degree, individuals whose highest educational qualification was a GCSE or equivalent had an OR of 1·27 (95% CI: 1·18 to 1·37) in March-May 2020 and 1·13 (95% CI: 1.·10 to 1·16) in January-March 2021. The magnitude of the association between educational attainment and testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 infection increased over the same period. For the equivalent comparison, the OR for testing positive increased from 1·25 (95% CI: 1·04 to 1·47), to 1·69 (95% CI: 1·55 to 1·83). We found little evidence of an association between control exposures, and any considered outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The association between SEP and SARS-CoV-2 testing changed over time, highlighting the potential of time-specific selection pressures to bias analyses of COVID-19. Positive and negative control analyses suggest that changes in the association between SEP and SARS-CoV-2 infection over time likely reflect true increases in socioeconomic inequalities.

Evaluating causal associations of chronotype with pregnancy and perinatal outcomes and its interactions with insomnia and sleep duration: a Mendelian randomization study.

IMPORTANCE: Observational studies suggest that chronotype is associated with pregnancy and perinatal outcomes. Whether these associations are causal is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To explore associations of a lifetime genetic predisposition to an evening preference chronotype with pregnancy and perinatal outcomes, and explore differences in associations of insomnia and sleep duration with those outcomes between chronotype. DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We conducted two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR) using 105 genetic variants reported in a genome-wide association study (N=248 100) to instrument for lifelong predisposition to evening-versus morning-preference chronotypes. We generated variant-outcome associations in European ancestry women from UK Biobank (UKB, N=176 897), Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC, N=6826), Born in Bradford (BiB, N=2940) and Norwegian Mother, Father and Child Cohort Study (MoBa, with linked data from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway (MBRN), N=57 430), and extracted equivalent associations from FinnGen (N=190 879). We used inverse variance weighted (IVW) as main analysis, with weighted median and MR-Egger as sensitivity analyses. We also conducted IVW analyses of insomnia and sleep duration on the outcomes stratified by genetically predicted chronotype. EXPOSURES: Self-reported and genetically predicted chronotype, insomnia and sleep duration. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Stillbirth, miscarriage, preterm birth, gestational diabetes, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, perinatal depression, low birthweight and macrosomia. RESULTS: In IVW and sensitivity analyses we did not find robust evidence of effects of chronotype on the outcomes. Insomnia was associated with a higher risk of preterm birth among evening preference women (odds ratio 1.61, 95% confidence interval: 1.17, 2.21), but not among morning preference women (odds ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.64, 1.18), with an interaction P-value=0.01. There was no evidence of interactions between insomnia and chronotype on other outcomes, or between sleep duration and chronotype on any outcomes. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This study raises the possibility of a higher risk of preterm birth among women with insomnia who also have an evening preference chronotype. Our findings warrant replications due to imprecision of the estimates. Key points: Question: Does an evening preference chronotype adversely affect pregnancy and perinatal outcomes? Is there an interaction between chronotype and either insomnia or sleep duration in relation to those outcomes?Findings: There was no evidence that evening preference was associated with pregnancy or perinatal outcomes. Women with a genetically predicted insomnia had a higher risk of preterm birth, if they also had a genetically predicted preference for evening chronotype.Meaning: The suggestive interaction between insomnia and evening preference on preterm birth, if replicated, supports targeting insomnia prevention in women of reproductive age with an evening chronotype.