Overweight, obesity and fat distribution in 50- to 64-year-old participants in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)

Abstract

Objective: To describe anthropometric characteristics of participants of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). Design: A cross-sectional analysis of baseline data of a European prospective cohort study. Subjects: This analysis includes study populations from 25 centres in nine European countries. The British populations comprised both a population-based and a 'healthconscious' group. The analysis was restricted to 83 178 men and 163 851 women aged 50 -64 years, this group being represented in all centres. Methods: Anthropometric examinations were undertaken by trained observers using standardised methods and included measurements of weight, height, and waist and hip circumferences. In the 'health-conscious' group (UK), anthropometric measures were predicted from self-reports. Results: Except in the 'health-conscious' group (UK) and in the French centres, mean body mass index (BMI) exceeded 25.0 kg m 22 . The prevalence of obesity (BMI $ 30 kg m 22 ) varied from 8% to 40% in men, and from 5% to 53% in women, with high prevalences (. 25%) in the centres from Spain, Greece, Ragusa and Naples (Italy) and the lowest prevalences (,10%) in the French centres and the 'healthconscious' group (UK). The prevalence of a large waist circumference or a high waistto-hip ratio was high in centres from Spain, Greece, Ragusa and Naples (Italy) and among women from centres in Germany and Bilthoven (The Netherlands). Conclusions: Anthropometric measures varied considerably within the EPIC population. These data provide a strong base for further investigation of anthropometric measures in relation to the risk of chronic diseases, especially cancer.

Dietary glycaemic index, glycaemic load and subsequent changes of weight and waist circumference in European men and women

“…25 Weight and waist circumference were self-reported instead of measured in four out of six study centres, potentially causing heterogeneity. In additional analyses, we corrected anthropometrics for clothing differences and self-reporting using methods previously developed in the EPIC study, 35 but the results did not appreciably change. To investigate the influence of the site differences for waist circumference measurements, we have applied the regression equations developed in a previous study 37 to correct the waist circumference at baseline and at follow-up.…”

“…Several sensitivity analyses were carried out for the main analyses, including the use of uncalibrated dietary variables, using anthropometric variables corrected for clothing differences and self-reporting using methods developed earlier in the EPIC study, 35 excluding those participants who selfreported onset of cancer, type 2 diabetes or CVDs during GI, GL and subsequent changes of weight and waist H Du et al follow-up. Except for the random-effect meta-analyses, which were conducted using STATA 8.2 (StataCorp, Texas, USA), all statistical analyses were carried out using SAS 9.1 (SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).…”

“…The methods used have been previously described in detail. 35 In brief, body weight and height were measured when participants wore light clothes and no shoes. Waist circumference was measured either at the midway between the lowest rib and the iliac crest (NL-AmMa, NL-Doe and GER-Pot) or at the narrowest torso circumference (the other centres).…”

Reproductive and hormone‐related risk factors for epithelial ovarian cancer by histologic pathways, invasiveness and histologic subtypes: Results from the EPIC cohort

“…Height (cm) and weight (kg) were measured according to standardized procedures, except for the Oxford cohort, the Norwegian cohort, and part of the French cohort, where height and weight were predominantly self-reported. 17 For participants from the Oxford cohort, where only self-reported data were available, linear regression models were used to recalibrate values using age-specific measurements from subjects with both measured and self-reported body measures. These measures were used to calculate body mass index (BMI; kg m 22 ).…”

Diet and hip fractures among elderly Europeans in the EPIC cohort

“…Anthropometric measurements (height and weight) were taken in all centers using similar, standardized procedures (Haftenberger et al, 2002). Body mass index was calculated as the ratio of weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters (in kg/m 2 ).…”