Table 1 Characteristics of studies included in systematic review of dietary glycaemic index, glycaemic load and risk of breast cancer

From: Dietary glycaemic index, glycaemic load and breast cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis

         

Adjusted confounders

Authors (date), location

Study

Study design (mean follow-up)

Cases

Controls/cohort size

Diet assessment

Quality scale score

Median GI (IQ range)

Median GL (IQ range)

Age

BMI

Energy

Hormon.

Reprod.

Menstr.

Smoking

PA

Education

Alcohol

Family

BBD

Lajous et al (2008), France

E3N Study

Prospective cohort (9 years)a

1812

62 739

Self-reported 208-item FFQ

9/9

55 (44–66)

123 (84–165)

 

Sieri et al (2007), Italy

ORDET Study

Prospective cohort (11.5 years)

289

8959

Self-reported 107-item FFQ

8/9

56 (52–59)

113 (97–151)

 

  

McCann et al (2007), USA

WEB Study

Population-based case–control

1166

2105

Interviewed FFQ

7/9

77 (70–83)b

147 (104–186)b

 

  

 

Giles et al (2006), Australia

Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study

Prospective cohort (9.1 years)

324

12 273

Self-reported 121-item FFQ

9/9

49 (46–53)

108 (77–150)

#

#

#

 

#

#

#

#

 

Nielsen et al (2005), Denmark

Diet, Cancer & Health Cohort

Prospective cohort (6.6 years)

634

23 870

Self-reported 192-item FFQ

9/9

 

   

  

Silvera et al (2005), Canada

National Breast Screening Study

Prospective cohort (16.6 years)

2518

49 111

Self-reported 86-item FFQ

9/9

77 (60–96)

104 (83–123)

   

Lajous et al (2005), Mexico

 

Population-based case–control

475

1391

Interviewed FFQ

7/9

62 (—)

152 (44–214)

 

    

 

Higginbotham et al (2004), USA

Women's Health Study

Prospective cohort (6.8 years)

946

38 446

Self-reported 131-item FFQ

9/9

53 (50–55)

117 (92–143)

 

 

Holmes et al (2004), USA

Nurses’ Health Study

Prospective cohort (18 years)

4092

88 678

Multiple self-reported 61+ item FFQs

8/9

75 (69–81)

105 (81–130)

 

   

Frazier et al (2004), USA

Nurses’ Health Study II

Retrospective cohort

361

47 355

Self-reported 131-item FFQ

8/9

79 (74–84)

170 (141–202)

   

Cho et al (2003), USA

Nurses’ Health Study II

Prospective cohort (8 years)a

714

90 655

Self-reported 133-item FFQ 142-item FFQ

8/9

77 (70–82)

120 (97–148)

  

Jonas et al (2003), USA

CPS II Nutrition Cohort

Prospective cohort (5 years)

1442

63 307

Self-reported 68-item FFQ

8/9

74 (65–85)

81 (58–103)

Levi et al (2002), Switzerland

 

Hospital-based case–control

331

534

Interviewed 79-item FFQ

6/9

92 (73–112)

 

 

  

Augustin et al (2001), Italy

 

Hospital-based case–control

2569

2588

Interviewed 78-item FFQ

6/9

74 (70–79)

132 (98–174)

 

 

  
  1. CPS=Cancer Prevention Study; E3N=French component of European Prospective Investigation into Diet and Cancer Study; ORDET=Hormones and Diet in Etiology of Breast Tumors Study; WEB=Western New York Exposure and Breast Cancer Study.
  2. aTotal follow-up length, mean not reported.
  3. bPostmenopausal GI/GL data; majority of study participants (60–70%) are postmenopausal.
  4. Adjusted confounders: age; BMI=body mass index or body weight; energy=energy intake; hormon.=hormone replacement therapy/oral contraceptive use; reprod.=reproductive factors (e.g., parity, age at first birth); menstr.=menstrual history (e.g., age at menarche or menopause, menopausal status); smoking; PA=physical activity; education; alcohol=alcohol intake; family=family history of breast cancer; BBD=history of benign breast disease. # confounder tested but not included in final model.