<HashMap><database>biostudies-literature</database><scores/><additional><submitter>Gaudet MM</submitter><funding>Intramural NIH HHS</funding><funding>NCI NIH HHS</funding><pagination>673-81</pagination><full_dataset_link>https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC4481608</full_dataset_link><repository>biostudies-literature</repository><omics_type>Unknown</omics_type><volume>44(2)</volume><pubmed_abstract>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Associations between anthropometry and head and neck cancer (HNC) risk are inconsistent. We aimed to evaluate these associations while minimizing biases found in previous studies.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We pooled data from 1,941,300 participants, including 3760 cases, in 20 cohort studies and used multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association of anthropometric measures with HNC risk overall and stratified by smoking status.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Greater waist circumference (per 5 cm: HR = 1.04, 95% CI 1.03-1.05, P-value for trend = &lt;0.0001) and waist-to-hip ratio (per 0.1 unit: HR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.05-1.09, P-value for trend = &lt;0.0001), adjusted for body mass index (BMI), were associa</pubmed_abstract><journal>International journal of epidemiology</journal><pubmed_title>Anthropometry and head and neck cancer:a pooled analysis of cohort data.</pubmed_title><pmcid>PMC4481608</pmcid><funding_grant_id>UM1 CA182910</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>Z01 ES049030</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>UM1 CA182913</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>K05 CA154337</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>Z01-CP010119</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>UM1 CA173640</funding_grant_id><funding_grant_id>Z01 CP010119</funding_grant_id><pubmed_authors>Schairer C</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Beane Freeman LE</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Huang WY</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sesso HD</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hartge P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Boeing H</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Buring J</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Hakansson N</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Weiderpass E</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Prizment A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Park Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gapstur SM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gao YT</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Giles GG</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chen Y</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>White E</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>D'Aloisio AA</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Adami HO</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Wolk A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>MacInnis RJ</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Riboli E</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Robien K</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Yang G</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kitahara CM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Freedman M</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Berrington de Gonzalez A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Kreimer AR</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gaudet MM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Patel AV</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Linet MS</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Reynolds P</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Purdue MP</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Sandler DP</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Alavanja MC</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Zelenuich-Jacquotte A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Zheng W</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Chaturvedi A</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Ou Shu X</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Lee IM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Xiang YB</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Newton CC</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Gaziano JM</pubmed_authors><pubmed_authors>Bernstein L</pubmed_authors></additional><is_claimable>false</is_claimable><name>Anthropometry and head and neck cancer:a pooled analysis of cohort data.</name><description>&lt;h4>Background&lt;/h4>Associations between anthropometry and head and neck cancer (HNC) risk are inconsistent. We aimed to evaluate these associations while minimizing biases found in previous studies.&lt;h4>Methods&lt;/h4>We pooled data from 1,941,300 participants, including 3760 cases, in 20 cohort studies and used multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association of anthropometric measures with HNC risk overall and stratified by smoking status.&lt;h4>Results&lt;/h4>Greater waist circumference (per 5 cm: HR = 1.04, 95% CI 1.03-1.05, P-value for trend = &lt;0.0001) and waist-to-hip ratio (per 0.1 unit: HR = 1.07, 95% CI 1.05-1.09, P-value for trend = &lt;0.0001), adjusted for body mass index (BMI), were associa</description><dates><release>2015-01-01T00:00:00Z</release><publication>2015 Apr</publication><modification>2025-04-05T10:12:19.658Z</modification><creation>2019-03-27T01:54:05Z</creation></dates><accession>S-EPMC4481608</accession><cross_references><pubmed>26050257</pubmed><doi>10.1093/ije/dyv059</doi></cross_references></HashMap>