Nakaya Naoki, Tsubono Yoshitaka, Hosokawa Toru, Nishino Yoshikazu, Ohkubo Takayoshi, Hozawa Atsushi, Shibuya Daisuke, Fukudo Shin, Fukao Akira, Tsuji Ichiro, Hisamichi Shigeru
Division of Epidemiology, Department of Public Health and Forensic Medicine, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003 Jun 4;95(11):799-805. doi: 10.1093/jnci/95.11.799.
The role of personality in the causation of cancer has been controversial. We examined this question in a large, prospective study.
From June through August 1990, 30 277 residents of Miyagi Prefecture in northern Japan completed a Japanese version of the short form of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire-Revised and a questionnaire on various health habits. There were 671 prevalent cases of cancer at baseline, and 986 incident cases of cancer were identified during 7 years of follow-up, through December 1997. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the relative risk (RR) of incident cancer (total, stomach, colorectal, breast, and lung) according to four levels of each of four personality subscales (extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism, and lie), with adjustment for sex, age, education, smoking, alcohol use, body mass index, and family history of cancer. Statistical tests were two-sided.
Multivariable RRs of total cancer for individuals in the highest level of each personality subscale as compared with those in the lowest were 0.9 for extraversion (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.7 to 1.1; P(trend) =.32), 1.1 for psychoticism (95% CI = 0.9 to 1.3; P(trend) =.96), 0.9 for lie (95% CI = 0.7 to 1.0; P(trend) =.19), and 1.2 for neuroticism (95% CI = 1.0 to 1.4; P(trend) =.06). There were no associations between any personality subscale and risk of specific cancers. Neuroticism showed statistically significant positive, linear associations with prevalent cancer at baseline (P(trend)<.001) and with the 320 incident cancer cases diagnosed within the first 3 years of follow-up (P(trend) =.03); however, it showed no association with the 666 cases diagnosed during the fourth through the seventh years of follow-up (P(trend) =.43).
Our data do not support the hypothesis that personality is a risk factor for cancer incidence. The association between neuroticism and prevalent cancer may be a consequence, rather than a cause, of cancer diagnosis or symptoms.
人格在癌症病因中的作用一直存在争议。我们在一项大型前瞻性研究中探讨了这个问题。
1990年6月至8月,日本北部宫城县的30277名居民完成了一份日语版的艾森克人格问卷简式修订版以及一份关于各种健康习惯的问卷。基线时共有671例癌症现患病例,在截至1997年12月的7年随访期间,共发现986例癌症新发病例。我们使用Cox比例风险回归来估计根据四个人格子量表(外向性、神经质、精神质和说谎量表)每个量表的四个水平发生癌症(总计、胃癌、结直肠癌、乳腺癌和肺癌)的相对风险(RR),并对性别、年龄、教育程度、吸烟、饮酒、体重指数和癌症家族史进行了调整。统计检验为双侧检验。
与每个子量表最低水平的个体相比,最高水平个体患总癌症的多变量RR分别为:外向性为0.9(95%置信区间[CI]=0.7至1.1;P(趋势)=0.32),精神质为1.1(95%CI=0.9至1.3;P(趋势)=0.96),说谎量表为0.9(95%CI=0.7至1.0;P(趋势)=0.19),神经质为1.2(95%CI=1.0至1.4;P(趋势)=0.06)。任何人格子量表与特定癌症风险之间均无关联。神经质与基线时的现患癌症(P(趋势)<0.001)以及随访前3年内诊断出的320例癌症新发病例(P(趋势)=0.03)在统计学上显示出显著的正线性关联;然而,它与随访第4年至第7年诊断出的666例病例无关联(P(趋势)=0.43)。
我们的数据不支持人格是癌症发病风险因素这一假设。神经质与现患癌症之间的关联可能是癌症诊断或症状的结果,而非原因。