Skip to main content

Table 5 Odds of prostate cancer in relation to PRAL and NEAP among 60 prostatic cancer cases and 60 hospital-based controlsa

From: The association between dietary acid load and odds of prostate cancer: a case-control study

Patterns

Categories of PRAL and NEAP scores

Tertile 1

Tertile 2

Tertile 3

P trend

PRAL

(<-14.28 mEq/d)

(-14.28 to 2.57 mEq/d)

(> 2.57 mEq/d)

 

No. cases/controls

12/28

20/20

28/12

 

 Crude

1.00 (Ref)

2.33(0.93–5.84)

4.88(2.22–13.41)

0.001

 Model 1

1.00 (Ref)

1.78(0.62–5.12)

3.94(1.37–1131)

0.01

 Model 2

1.00 (Ref)

1.72(0.89–5.04)

3.94(1.32–11.71)

0.01

 Model 3

1.00 (Ref)

2.07(0.68–6.32)

3.42(1.11–8.65)

0.03

 NEAP

(< 38.09 mEq/d)

(38.09 to 49.97 mEq/d)

(> 49.97 mEq/d)

 

No. cases/controls

12/28

20/20

28/12

 

 Crude

1.00 (Ref)

2.33(0.93–5.84)

5.44(2.09–14.17)

0.001

 Model 1

1.00 (Ref)

1.64(0.59–4.58)

4.25(1.49–12.10)

0.01

 Model 2

1.00 (Ref)

1.55(0.55–4.39)

4.29(1.45–12.71)

0.01

 Model 3

1.00 (Ref)

1.63(0.56–4.79)

3.88(1.26–9.55)

0.02

  1. PRAL, potential renal acid load; NEAP, net endogenous acid production
  2. a Multivariable logistic regression was used
  3. Data are presented as odds ratio (95% confidence interval)
  4. Model 1: Adjusted for age, body mass index, energy intake, smoking, and physical activity
  5. Model 2: Adjusted for confounders in model 1 plus ethnicity, job, and education
  6. Model 3: Adjusted for confounders in model 2 plus drug usage (Anti-hyperlipidemic drugs, antihypertensive drugs, and aspirin)