https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9628-6933
![Sample our Health and Social Care journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5938/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Health-Social-Care.jpg"})
Abstract
Data on the link between legume and nuts consumption and risk of glioma are controversial. The current study aimed to investigate the relation between legume and nuts consumption and glioma in a case-control study in Iranian adults. In this hospital-based case-control study, we enrolled 128 pathologically confirmed new cases of glioma and 256 age and sex-matched controls. Dietary intakes of study participants were assessed using the validated Block-format 123-item semi-quantitative FFQ. Data on potential confounders were also collected through the use of a pre-tested questionnaire. Mean age of cases and controls were 43.4 and 42.8 years, respectively. Individuals with the greatest legume and nuts consumption were less likely to have glioma compared with those with the lowest consumption (0.52; 95% CI: 0.30–0.88). This inverse association was not changed after controlling for age, sex and energy intake (0.46; 95% CI: 0.26–0.81). The association remained statistically significant even after taking other potential confounders, including dietary intakes into account (0.32; 95% CI: 0.14–0.72). Additional adjustments for BMI did not alter the association; such that individuals in the top category of legume and nuts consumption were 66% less likely to have glioma compared with those in the bottom category (0.34; 95% CI: 0.15–0.76). We found an inverse association between legume and nuts consumption and odds of glioma, even after controlling for a wide range of confounders.
Conflict of interest
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Authors’ Contribution to Manuscript
Hanieh Malmir (HM), Mehdi Shayanfar (MS), Minoo Mohammad-Shirazi (MMS), Giuve Sharifi (GS), and Ahmad Esmaillzadeh (AE) designed the research; HM and MS conducted the research; HM and MS performed statistical analysis; HM and AE wrote the paper; AE had responsibility for final content. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Correction Statement
This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.