Hormone replacement therapy and breast cancer risk in California

Numerous studies have documented increased breast cancer risks with hormone replacement therapy (HRT), but these do not give a woman her specific absolute risk for the remainder of her life. This article estimates the magnitude of the effect of HRT on breast cancer incidence in California and calculates a woman's cumulative risk of breast cancer with different formulations and durations of HRT use. The effects of HRT on the underlying breast cancer incidence were estimated using the attributable fraction method, applying HRT prevalence data from the 2001 California Health Interview Survey and published rates of higher relative risk (RR) from HRT use from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) study and Million Women's Survey (MWS). The annual number of breast cancers potentially attributable to HRT in California was estimated, along with individual cumulative risk of breast cancer for various ages to 79 years according to HRT use, duration, and formulation. Using the WHI data, 829 of 19,000 breast cancers (4.3%) in California may be attributable to HRT This figure increases to 3401 (17.4%) when the MWS RRs are applied. Use of estrogen-only HRT or short-term (approximately 5 years) use of combined HRT has a minimal effect on the cumulative risk calculated to the age of 79 years; application of the MWS data to a Californian woman commencing HRT at the age of 50 years (no HRT, 8.5%; estrogen only, 8.6%; combined, 9.1%). Prolonged (approximately 10 years) use of combined HRT increases the cumulative risk to 10.3%. This article demonstrates that HRT will generate a small additional risk of breast cancer in an individual. The reduction in perimenopausal symptoms may be considered sufficient to warrant this extra risk. However, this view needs to be balanced because the small increases in individual risk will be magnified, producing a noticeable change in population cancer caseload where HRT use is high.

Menarche, menopause, and breast cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis, including 118 964 women with breast cancer from 117 epidemiological studies.

BACKGROUND: Menarche and menopause mark the onset and cessation, respectively, of ovarian activity associated with reproduction, and affect breast cancer risk. Our aim was to assess the strengths of their effects and determine whether they depend on characteristics of the tumours or the affected women. METHODS: Individual data from 117 epidemiological studies, including 118 964 women with invasive breast cancer and 306 091 without the disease, none of whom had used menopausal hormone therapy, were included in the analyses. We calculated adjusted relative risks (RRs) associated with menarche and menopause for breast cancer overall, and by tumour histology and by oestrogen receptor expression. FINDINGS: Breast cancer risk increased by a factor of 1·050 (95% CI 1·044-1·057; p<0·0001) for every year younger at menarche, and independently by a smaller amount (1·029, 1·025-1·032; p<0·0001), for every year older at menopause. Premenopausal women had a greater risk of breast cancer than postmenopausal women of an identical age (RR at age 45-54 years 1·43, 1·33-1·52, p<0·001). All three of these associations were attenuated by increasing adiposity among postmenopausal women, but did not vary materially by women's year of birth, ethnic origin, childbearing history, smoking, alcohol consumption, or hormonal contraceptive use. All three associations were stronger for lobular than for ductal tumours (p<0·006 for each comparison). The effect of menopause in women of an identical age and trends by age at menopause were stronger for oestrogen receptor-positive disease than for oestrogen receptor-negative disease (p<0·01 for both comparisons). INTERPRETATION: The effects of menarche and menopause on breast cancer risk might not be acting merely by lengthening women's total number of reproductive years. Endogenous ovarian hormones are more relevant for oestrogen receptor-positive disease than for oestrogen receptor-negative disease and for lobular than for ductal tumours. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

The INSIG2 rs7566605 polymorphism is not associated with body mass index and breast cancer risk

Background The single nucleotide polymorphism rs7566605, located in the promoter of the INSIG2 gene, has been the subject of a strong scientific effort aimed to elucidate its possible association with body mass index (BMI). The first report showing that rs7566605 could be associated with body fatness was a genome-wide association study (GWAS) which used BMI as the primary phenotype. Many follow-up studies sought to validate the association of rs7566605 with various markers of obesity, with several publications reporting inconsistent findings. BMI is considered to be one of the measures of choice to evaluate body fatness and there is evidence that body fatness is related with an increased risk of breast cancer (BC). Methods we tested in a large-scale association study (3,973 women, including 1,269 invasive BC cases and 2,194 controls), nested within the EPIC cohort, the involvement of rs7566605 as predictor of BMI and BC risk. Results and Conclusions In this study we were not able to find any statistically significant association between this SNP and BMI, nor did we find any significant association between the SNP and an increased risk of breast cancer overall and by subgroups of age, or menopausal status.

Adiposity, hormone replacement therapy use and breast cancer risk by age and hormone receptor status: a large prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION Associations of hormone-receptor positive breast cancer with excess adiposity are reasonably well characterized; however, uncertainty remains regarding the association of body mass index (BMI) with hormone-receptor negative malignancies, and possible interactions by hormone replacement therapy (HRT) use. METHODS Within the European EPIC cohort, Cox proportional hazards models were used to describe the relationship of BMI, waist and hip circumferences with risk of estrogen-receptor (ER) negative and progesterone-receptor (PR) negative (n = 1,021) and ER+PR+ (n = 3,586) breast tumors within five-year age bands. Among postmenopausal women, the joint effects of BMI and HRT use were analyzed. RESULTS For risk of ER-PR- tumors, there was no association of BMI across the age bands. However, when analyses were restricted to postmenopausal HRT never users, a positive risk association with BMI (third versus first tertile HR = 1.47 (1.01 to 2.15)) was observed. BMI was inversely associated with ER+PR+ tumors among women aged ≤49 years (per 5 kg/m2 increase, HR = 0.79 (95%CI 0.68 to 0.91)), and positively associated with risk among women ≥65 years (HR = 1.25 (1.16 to 1.34)). Adjusting for BMI, waist and hip circumferences showed no further associations with risks of breast cancer subtypes. Current use of HRT was significantly associated with an increased risk of receptor-negative (HRT current use compared to HRT never use HR: 1.30 (1.05 to 1.62)) and positive tumors (HR: 1.74 (1.56 to 1.95)), although this risk increase was weaker for ER-PR- disease (Phet = 0.035). The association of HRT was significantly stronger in the leaner women (BMI ≤22.5 kg/m2) than for more overweight women (BMI ≥25.9 kg/m2) for, both, ER-PR- (HR: 1.74 (1.15 to 2.63)) and ER+PR+ (HR: 2.33 (1.84 to 2.92)) breast cancer and was not restricted to any particular HRT regime. CONCLUSIONS An elevated BMI may be positively associated with risk of ER-PR- tumors among postmenopausal women who never used HRT. Furthermore, postmenopausal HRT users were at an increased risk of ER-PR- as well as ER+PR+ tumors, especially among leaner women. For hormone-receptor positive tumors, but not for hormone-receptor negative tumors, our study confirms an inverse association of risk with BMI among young women of premenopausal age. Our data provide evidence for a possible role of sex hormones in the etiology of hormone-receptor negative tumors.

Circulating prolactin and in situ breast cancer risk in the European EPIC cohort: a case-control study.

INTRODUCTION The relationship between circulating prolactin and invasive breast cancer has been investigated previously, but the association between prolactin levels and in situ breast cancer risk has received less attention. METHODS We analysed the relationship between pre-diagnostic prolactin levels and the risk of in situ breast cancer overall, and by menopausal status and use of postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) at blood donation. Conditional logistic regression was used to assess this association in a case-control study nested within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort, including 307 in situ breast cancer cases and their matched control subjects. RESULTS We found a significant positive association between higher circulating prolactin levels and risk of in situ breast cancer among all women [pre-and postmenopausal combined, ORlog2 = 1.35 (95%CI 1.04-1.76), Ptrend = 0.03]. No statistically significant heterogeneity was found between prolactin levels and in situ cancer risk by menopausal status (Phet = 0.98) or baseline HT use (Phet = 0.20), although the observed association was more pronounced among postmenopausal women using HT compared to non-users (Ptrend = 0.06 vs Ptrend = 0.35). In subgroup analyses, the observed positive association was strongest in women diagnosed with in situ breast tumors <4 years compared to ≥4 years after blood donation (Ptrend = 0.01 vs Ptrend = 0.63; Phet = 0.04) and among nulliparous women compared to parous women (Ptrend = 0.03 vs Ptrend = 0.15; Phet = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS Our data extends prior research linking prolactin and invasive breast cancer to the outcome of in situ breast tumours and shows that higher circulating prolactin is associated with increased risk of in situ breast cancer.

Circulating sex hormones and breast cancer risk factors in postmenopausal women: reanalysis of 13 studies.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer risk for postmenopausal women is positively associated with circulating concentrations of oestrogens and androgens, but the determinants of these hormones are not well understood. METHODS: Cross-sectional analyses of breast cancer risk factors and circulating hormone concentrations in more than 6000 postmenopausal women controls in 13 prospective studies. RESULTS: Concentrations of all hormones were lower in older than younger women, with the largest difference for dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate (DHEAS), whereas sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) was higher in the older women. Androgens were lower in women with bilateral ovariectomy than in naturally postmenopausal women, with the largest difference for free testosterone. All hormones were higher in obese than lean women, with the largest difference for free oestradiol, whereas SHBG was lower in obese women. Smokers of 15+ cigarettes per day had higher levels of all hormones than non-smokers, with the largest difference for testosterone. Drinkers of 20+ g alcohol per day had higher levels of all hormones, but lower SHBG, than non-drinkers, with the largest difference for DHEAS. Hormone concentrations were not strongly related to age at menarche, parity, age at first full-term pregnancy or family history of breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Sex hormone concentrations were strongly associated with several established or suspected risk factors for breast cancer, and may mediate the effects of these factors on breast cancer risk.

Premenopausal serum androgens and breast cancer risk: a nested case-control study.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: Prospective epidemiologic studies have consistently shown that levels of circulating androgens in postmenopausal women are positively associated with breast cancer risk. However, data in premenopausal women are limited. METHODS: A case-control study nested within the New York University Women's Health Study was conducted. A total of 356 cases (276 invasive and 80 in situ) and 683 individually-matched controls were included. Matching variables included age and date, phase, and day of menstrual cycle at blood donation. Testosterone, androstenedione, dehydroandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS) and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) were measured using direct immunoassays. Free testosterone was calculated. RESULTS: Premenopausal serum testosterone and free testosterone concentrations were positively associated with breast cancer risk. In models adjusted for known risk factors of breast cancer, the odds ratios for increasing quintiles of testosterone were 1.0 (reference), 1.5 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.9 to 2.3), 1.2 (95% CI, 0.7 to 1.9), 1.4 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.3) and 1.8 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.9; Ptrend = 0.04), and for free testosterone were 1.0 (reference), 1.2 (95% CI, 0.7 to 1.8), 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.3), 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.3), and 1.8 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.8, Ptrend = 0.01). A marginally significant positive association was observed with androstenedione (P = 0.07), but no association with DHEAS or SHBG. Results were consistent in analyses stratified by tumor type (invasive, in situ), estrogen receptor status, age at blood donation, and menopausal status at diagnosis. Intra-class correlation coefficients for samples collected from 0.8 to 5.3 years apart (median 2 years) in 138 cases and 268 controls were greater than 0.7 for all biomarkers except for androstenedione (0.57 in controls). CONCLUSIONS: Premenopausal concentrations of testosterone and free testosterone are associated with breast cancer risk. Testosterone and free testosterone measurements are also highly reliable (that is, a single measurement is reflective of a woman's average level over time). Results from other prospective studies are consistent with our results. The impact of including testosterone or free testosterone in breast cancer risk prediction models for women between the ages of 40 and 50 years should be assessed. Improving risk prediction models for this age group could help decision making regarding both screening and chemoprevention of breast cancer.

Complex organochlorine pesticide mixtures as determinant factor for breast cancer risk: a population-based case-control study in the Canary Islands (Spain)

[EN] Background: All the relevant risk factors contributing to breast cancer etiology are not fully known. Exposure to organochlorine pesticides has been linked to an increased incidence of the disease, although not all data have been consistent. Most published studies evaluated the exposure to organochlorines individually, ignoring the potential effects exerted by the mixtures of chemicals. Methods: This population-based study was designed to evaluate the profile of mixtures of organochlorines detected in 103 healthy women and 121 women diagnosed with breast cancer from Gran Canaria Island, and the relation between the exposure to these compounds and breast cancer risk.Results: The most prevalent mixture of organochlorines among healthy women was the combination of lindane and endrin, and this mixture was not detected in any affected women. Breast cancer patients presented more frequently a combination of aldrin, dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE) and dichlorodiphenyldichloroethane (DDD), and this mixture was not found in any healthy woman. After adjusting for covariables, the risk of breast cancer was moderately associated with DDD (OR = 1.008, confidence interval 95% 1.001-1.015, p = 0.024).Conclusions: This study indicates that healthy women show a very different profile of organochlorine pesticide mixtures than breast cancer patients, suggesting that organochlorine pesticide mixtures could play a relevant role in breast cancer risk.

Predicting perceived vulnerability for breast cancer among women with an average breast cancer risk

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present study was to investigate predictors of perceived vulnerability for breast cancer in women with an average risk for breast cancer. On the basis of empirical findings that suggested which variables might be associated with perceived vulnerability for breast cancer, we investigated whether knowledge of breast cancer risk factors, cancer worry, intrusions about breast cancer, optimism about not getting cancer and perceived health status have a predictive value for perceived breast cancer vulnerability. DESIGN: In a 3-step approach, we recruited 292 women from the general public in Germany who had neither a family history of breast cancer nor breast cancer themselves. After receiving an initial informational letter about study objectives, the women were interviewed by telephone and then asked to fill in a self-administered questionnaire. METHODS: We used structural equation modelling and hypothesized that each of the included variables has a direct influence on perceived vulnerability for breast cancer. RESULTS: We found a valid model with acceptable fit indices. Optimism about not getting cancer, intrusions about breast cancer and women's perceived health status explained 32% of the variance of perceived vulnerability for breast cancer. Cancer worry and knowledge about breast cancer did not influence perceived vulnerability for breast cancer. CONCLUSION: Perceived vulnerability for breast cancer is associated with health-related variables more than with knowledge about breast cancer risk factors.

Validity assessment of the Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Health Belief scale.

BACKGROUND: : Women at increased risk of breast cancer (BC) are not widely accepting of chemopreventive interventions, and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in related trials. Furthermore, there is no validated instrument to assess the health-seeking behavior of these women with respect to these interventions. METHODS: : By using constructs from the Health Belief Model, the authors developed and refined, based on pilot data, the Breast Cancer Risk Reduction Health Belief (BCRRHB) scale using a population of 265 women at increased risk of BC who were largely medically underserved, of low socioeconomic status (SES), and ethnic minorities. Construct validity was assessed using principal components analysis with oblique rotation to extract factors, and generate and interpret summary scales. Internal consistency was determined using Cronbach alpha coefficients. RESULTS: : Test-retest reliability for the pilot and final data was calculated to be r = 0.85. Principal components analysis yielded 16 components that explained 64% of the total variance, with communalities ranging from 0.50-0.75. Cronbach alpha coefficients for the extracted factors ranged from 0.45-0.77. CONCLUSIONS: : Evidence suggests that the BCRRHB yields reliable and valid data that allows for the identification of barriers and enhancing factors associated with use of breast cancer chemoprevention in the study population. These findings allow for tailoring treatment plans and intervention strategies to the individual. Future research is needed to validate the scale for use in other female populations. Cancer 2009. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.

Alcohol consumption and breast cancer risk among Hispanic and non-Hispanic women in New Mexico

Breast cancer incidence and mortality rates for Hispanic women are lower than for non-Hispanic white (NHW) women, but recently rates have increased more rapidly among Hispanic women. Many studies have shown a consistent increased breast cancer risk associated with modest or high alcohol intake, but few included Hispanic women. Alcohol consumption and risk of breast cancer was investigated in a New Mexico statewide population-based case-control study. The New Mexico Tumor Registry ascertained women, newly diagnosed with breast cancer (1992–1994) aged 30–74 years. Controls were identified by random digit dialing and were frequency-matched for ethnicity, age-group, and health planning district. In-person interviews of 712 cases and 844 controls were conducted. Data were collected for breast cancer risk factors, including alcohol intake. Recent alcohol intake data was collected for a four-week period, six months prior to interview. Past alcohol intake included information on alcohol consumption at ages 25, 35, and 50. History of alcohol consumption was reported by 81% of cases and 85% of controls. Of these women, 42% of cases and 48% of controls reported recent alcohol intake. Results for past alcohol intake did not show any trend with breast cancer risk, and were nonsignificant. Multivariate-adjusted odds ratios for recent alcohol intake and breast cancer suggested an increased risk at the highest level for both ethnic groups, but estimates were unstable and statistically nonsignificant. Low level of recent alcohol intake (<148 grams/week) was associated with a reduced risk for NHW women (Odds Ratio (OR) = 0.49 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.35–0.69). This pattern was independent of hormone-receptor status. The reduced breast cancer risk for low alcohol intake was present for premenopausal (OR = 0.29, 95% CI 0.15–0.56) and postmenopausal NHW women (OR = 0.56, 95% CI 0.35–0.90). The possibility of an increased risk associated with high alcohol intake could not be adequately addressed, because there were few drinkers with more than light to moderate intake, especially among Hispanic women. An alcohol-estrogen link is hypothesized to be the mechanism responsible for increased breast cancer risk, but has not been consistently substantiated. More studies are needed of the underlying mechanism for an association between alcohol intake and breast cancer. ^

Is breast cancer risk the same for all progestogens?

The population-based case–control study CECILE investigated the impact of various menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) products on breast cancer (BC) risk in 1,555 postmenopausal women [1]. The case group (n = 739) included incident cases of in situ (!) or invasive BC in postmenopausal women. The control group (n = 816) included women from the general population within predefined quotas by age and socio-economic status (SES). While quotas by age were applied to obtain similar distributions by age among controls and among cases, quotas by SES in control women were applied to reflect the distribution by SES of women in the general population in the study area. Data of participants were obtained by a structured questionnaire during in-person interviews, and from pathology reports if applicable, respectively. Women were divided into current and past MHT user. MHTs were classified in estrogen-only therapy (ET), estrogen combined with progestin therapy (EPT) and tibolone. EPT was subdivided in three subtypes according to the progestogen constituent: natural micronized progesterone, progesterone derivatives, and testosterone derivatives. In comparison to never MHT users, any current or past MHT use (ET, EPT, tibolone) was not associated with an increased BC risk. However, in subanalysis BC risk was significantly increased for current use of EPT for 4 or more years (n = 73 cases and n = 56 controls, adjusted OR 1.55; 95 % CI 1.02–2.36). Within the group of current EPT users for 4 or more years, 14 cases had used estrogens combined with micronized progesterone (n = 17 controls), and 55 a combination with a synthetic progestogen (n = 34 controls), respectively. Compared to never MHT use, current use of EPT containing a synthetic progestogen for 4 or more years was associated with a significantly increased BC risk (adjusted OR 2.07; 95 % CI 1.26–3.39), but EPT containing micronized progesterone was not (adjusted OR 0.79; 95 % CI 0.37–1.71). 73 % of current MHT users started treatment within the first year of onset of menopause. Early EPT (n = 52 cases and n = 38 controls, adjusted OR 1.65; 95 % CI 1.02–2.69), but not early ET, starters had a significantly higher BC risk compared to never MHT users. In contrast, MHT initiation beyond 1 year after menopause was not associated with an increased BC risk. The authors concluded that: (1) ET and EPT containing natural progesterone did not increase BC risk whereas, (2) BC risk was increased in users of tibolone or EPT containing a synthetic progestogen, respectively, and that (3) MHT use early after onset of menopause was associated with an increased BC risk as compared to women who delay MHT beyond 1 or more years.

Breast cancer risk and heterocyclic amines and effect modification by NAT gene polymorphisms

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women in the United States and is a leading cause of cancer-related deaths (1). Recently, dietary heterocyclic amines (HCAs) have been proposed to be a risk factor for breast cancer (2). This study uses the data collected for a case-control study conducted at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center to assess the association between breast cancer risk and HCAs {2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazole [4,5-b] pyridine (PhIP), 2-amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo [4,5-f] quinoxaline (MeIQx), 2-amino-3,4,8-trimethylimidazo [4,5-f] quinoxaline (DiMeIQx) and mutagenicity of HCAs} and to examine if this association is modified by genetic polymorphisms of N-acetyl transferases (NAT1/NAT2). The NAT1/2 genotype was determined using Taqman technology. HCAs were estimated by using a meat preparation questionnaire on meat type, cooking method, and doneness, combined with a quantitative HCA database. Three hundred and fifty patients with breast cancer attending the Diagnostic Radiology Clinic at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center and fulfilling the eligibility criteria were compared to three hundred and fifty patients attending the same clinic for benign breast lesions to answer these questions. Logistic regression models were used to control for known risk factors and showed no statistically significant association between breast cancer versus benign breast cancer lesions and dietary intake of heterocyclic amines. There was no clear difference in their effect after subgroup analyses in different acetylator strata of NAT1/2 and no statistical interactions were found between NAT1/2 genotypes and HCAs, suggesting no effect modification by NAT1/2 acetylator status. These results suggest the need for further research to analyze if these null associations were because of the benign breast lesions sharing the risk factors with breast cancer or any other factors which haven't been explored yet.^

The role of self-efficacy in a low fat high fiber intervention to reduce breast cancer risk among African American women

Purpose. To determine if self-efficacy (SE) changes predicted total fat (TF) and total fiber (TFB) intake and the relationship between SE changes and the two dietary outcomes. ^ Design. This is a secondary analysis, utilizing baseline and first follow up (FFU) data from the NULIFE, a randomized trial. ^ Setting. Nutrition classes were taught in the Texas Medical Center in Houston, Texas. ^ Participants. 79 pre-menopausal, 25--45 year old African American women with an 85% response rate at FFU. ^ Method. Dietary intake was assessed with the Arizona Food Frequency Questionnaire and SE with the Self Efficacy for Dietary Change Questionnaire. Analysis was done using Stata version 9. Linear and logistic regression was used with adjustment for confounders. ^ Results. Linear regression analyses showed that SE changes for eating fruits and vegetables predicted total fiber intake in the control group for both the univariate (P = 0.001) and multivariate (P = 0.01) models while SE for eating fruits and vegetables at first follow-up predicted total fiber intake in the intervention for both models (P = 0.000). Logistic regression analyses of low fat SE changes and 30% or less for total fat intake, showed an adjusted OR of 0.22 (95% CI = 0.03, 1.48; P = 0.12) in the intervention group. The logistic regression analyses of SE changes in fruits and vegetables and 10g or more for total fiber intake, showed an adjusted OR of 6.25 (95% CI = 0.53, 72.78; P = 0.14) in the control group. ^ Conclusion. SE for eating fruits and vegetables at first follow-up predicted intervention groups' TFB intake and intervention women that increased their SE for eating a low fat diet were more likely to achieve the study goal of 30% or less calories from TF. SE changes for eating fruits and vegetables predicted the control's TFB intake and control women that increased their SE for eating fruits and vegetables were more likely to achieve the study goal of 10 g or more from TFB. Limitations are use of self-report measures, small sample size, and possible control group contamination.^