SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Associations of milk, dairy products, calcium and vitamin D intake with risk of developing Parkinson´s disease within the EPIC4ND cohort.

Eur J Epidemiol · 2024-11-01

DOI: 10.1007/s10654-024-01183-9PMID: 39625618

Open accessresearch-article; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Literature indicates a potential association between dairy consumption and risk of Parkinson´s disease (PD), especially among men, yet the results remain inconclusive. We investigated this association in a large prospective European cohort. Dietary and non-dietary data was collected from 183,225 participants of the EPIC-for-Neurodegenerative-Diseases (EPIC4ND) cohort, a sub-cohort of the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. Crude and multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models were employed to examine potential associations between baseline dietary intake of dairy, calcium and vitamin D with incident PD risk. No relationship was observed between dairy consumption (HR 1.07, 95% CI 0.82-1.39), individual dairy products (milk: HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.73-1.23; yogurt: HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.82-1.29; cheese: HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.85-1.51), or vitamin D (HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.80-1.45) with PD risk. However, we observed a risk-increasing association with higher calcium intakes (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.00-1.78, p for trend = 0.031), which was more pronounced in men (HR 1.50, 95% CI 1.00-2.25, p for trend = 0.044) and in ever smokers (HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.06-2.53, p for trend = 0.014). No compelling evidence was found for an association between dairy products or vitamin D intake and PD risk indicating a potentially limited relevance of dairy intake in PD risk than previously described. Our observations of a positive association between dietary calcium intake and PD risk in men and in ever smokers require further validation.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.