Dataset Information

Alcohol, tobacco and breast cancer--collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 58,515 women with breast cancer and 95,067 women without the disease.

ABSTRACT: Alcohol and tobacco consumption are closely correlated and published results on their association with breast cancer have not always allowed adequately for confounding between these exposures. Over 80% of the relevant information worldwide on alcohol and tobacco consumption and breast cancer were collated, checked and analysed centrally. Analyses included 58,515 women with invasive breast cancer and 95,067 controls from 53 studies. Relative risks of breast cancer were estimated, after stratifying by study, age, parity and, where appropriate, women's age when their first child was born and consumption of alcohol and tobacco. The average consumption of alcohol reported by controls from developed countries was 6.0 g per day, i.e. about half a unit/drink of alcohol per day, and was greater in ever-smokers than never-smokers, (8.4 g per day and 5.0 g per day, respectively). Compared with women who reported drinking no alcohol, the relative risk of breast cancer was 1.32 (1.19-1.45, P<0.00001) for an intake of 35-44 g per day alcohol, and 1.46 (1.33-1.61, P<0.00001) for >/=45 g per day alcohol. The relative risk of breast cancer increased by 7.1% (95% CI 5.5-8.7%; P<0.00001) for each additional 10 g per day intake of alcohol, i.e. for each extra unit or drink of alcohol consumed on a daily basis. This increase was the same in ever-smokers and never-smokers (7.1% per 10 g per day, P<0.00001, in each group). By contrast, the relationship between smoking and breast cancer was substantially confounded by the effect of alcohol. When analyses were restricted to 22 255 women with breast cancer and 40 832 controls who reported drinking no alcohol, smoking was not associated with breast cancer (compared to never-smokers, relative risk for ever-smokers=1.03, 95% CI 0.98-1.07, and for current smokers=0.99, 0.92-1.05). The results for alcohol and for tobacco did not vary substantially across studies, study designs, or according to 15 personal characteristics of the women; nor were the findings materially confounded by any of these factors. If the observed relationship for alcohol is causal, these results suggest that about 4% of the breast cancers in developed countries are attributable to alcohol. In developing countries, where alcohol consumption among controls averaged only 0.4 g per day, alcohol would have a negligible effect on the incidence of breast cancer. In conclusion, smoking has little or no independent effect on the risk of developing breast cancer; the effect of alcohol on breast cancer needs to be interpreted in the context of its beneficial effects, in moderation, on cardiovascular disease and its harmful effects on cirrhosis and cancers of the mouth, larynx, oesophagus and liver.

SUBMITTER: Hamajima N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2562507 | biostudies-literature | 2002 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Alcohol, tobacco and breast cancer--collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 58,515 women with breast cancer and 95,067 women without the disease.

Hamajima N N Hirose K K Tajima K K Rohan T T Calle E E EE Heath C W CW Coates R J RJ Liff J M JM Talamini R R Chantarakul N N Koetsawang S S Rachawat D D Morabia A A Schuman L L Stewart W W Szklo M M Bain C C Schofield F F Siskind V V Band P P Coldman A J AJ Gallagher R P RP Hislop T G TG Yang P P Kolonel L M LM Nomura A M Y AM Hu J J Johnson K C KC Mao Y Y De Sanjosé S S Lee N N Marchbanks P P Ory H W HW Peterson H B HB Wilson H G HG Wingo P A PA Ebeling K K Kunde D D Nishan P P Hopper J L JL Colditz G G Gajalanski V V Martin N N Pardthaisong T T Silpisornkosol S S Theetranont C C Boosiri B B Chutivongse S S Jimakorn P P Virutamasen P P Wongsrichanalai C C Ewertz M M Adami H O HO Bergkvist L L Magnusson C C Persson I I Chang-Claude J J Paul C C Skegg D C G DC Spears G F S GF Boyle P P Evstifeeva T T Daling J R JR Hutchinson W B WB Malone K K Noonan E A EA Stanford J L JL Thomas D B DB Weiss N S NS White E E Andrieu N N Brêmond A A Clavel F F Gairard B B Lansac J J Piana L L Renaud R R Izquierdo A A Viladiu P P Cuevas H R HR Ontiveros P P Palet A A Salazar S B SB Aristizabel N N Cuadros A A Tryggvadottir L L Tulinius H H Bachelot A A Lê M G MG Peto J J Franceschi S S Lubin F F Modan B B Ron E E Wax Y Y Friedman G D GD Hiatt R A RA Levi F F Bishop T T Kosmelj K K Primic-Zakelj M M Ravnihar B B Stare J J Beeson W L WL Fraser G G Bullbrook R D RD Cuzick J J Duffy S W SW Fentiman I S IS Hayward J L JL Wang D Y DY McMichael A J AJ McPherson K K Hanson R L RL Leske M C MC Mahoney M C MC Nasca P C PC Varma A O AO Weinstein A L AL Moller T R TR Olsson H H Ranstam J J Goldbohm R A RA van den Brandt P A PA Apelo R A RA Baens J J de la Cruz J R JR Javier B B Lacaya L B LB Ngelangel C A CA La Vecchia C C Negri E E Marubini E E Ferraroni M M Gerber M M Richardson S S Segala C C Gatei D D Kenya P P Kungu A A Mati J G JG Brinton L A LA Hoover R R Schairer C C Spirtas R R Lee H P HP Rookus M A MA van Leeuwen F E FE Schoenberg J A JA McCredie M M Gammon M D MD Clarke E A EA Jones L L Neil A A Vessey M M Yeates D D Appleby P P Banks E E Beral V V Bull D D Crossley B B Goodill A A Green J J Hermon C C Key T T Langston N N Lewis C C Reeves G G Collins R R Doll R R Peto R R Mabuchi K K Preston D D Hannaford P P Kay C C Rosero-Bixby L L Gao Y T YT Jin F F Yuan J-M JM Wei H Y HY Yun T T Zhiheng C C Berry G G Cooper Booth J J Jelihovsky T T MacLennan R R Shearman R R Wang Q-S QS Baines C-J CJ Miller A B AB Wall C C Lund E E Stalsberg H H Shu X O XO Zheng W W Katsouyanni K K Trichopoulou A A Trichopoulos D D Dabancens A A Martinez L L Molina R R Salas O O Alexander F E FE Anderson K K Folsom A R AR Hulka B S BS Bernstein L L Enger S S Haile R W RW Paganini-Hill A A Pike M C MC Ross R K RK Ursin G G Yu M C MC Longnecker M P MP Newcomb P P Bergkvist L L Kalache A A Farley T M M TM Holck S S Meirik O O

British journal of cancer 20021101 11

Alcohol and tobacco consumption are closely correlated and published results on their association with breast cancer have not always allowed adequately for confounding between these exposures. Over 80% of the relevant information worldwide on alcohol and tobacco consumption and breast cancer were collated, checked and analysed centrally. Analyses included 58,515 women with invasive breast cancer and 95,067 controls from 53 studies. Relative risks of breast cancer were estimated, after stratifyin ...[more]

PMID: 12439712

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Associations between circulating concentrations of oestrogens, progesterone, and androgens with breast cancer and related risk factors in premenopausal women are not well understood. We aimed to characterise these associations with a pooled analysis of data from seven studies. METHODS:Individual participant data for prediagnostic sex hormone and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) concentrations were contributed from seven prospective studies. We restricted analyses to women who were premenopausal and younger than 50 years at blood collection, and to women with breast cancer diagnosed before age 50 years. We estimated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs for breast cancer associated with hormone concentrations by conditional logistic regression in cases and controls matched for age, date of blood collection, and day of cycle, with stratification by study and further adjustment for cycle phase. We examined associations of hormones with risk factors for breast cancer in control women by comparing geometric mean hormone concentrations in categories of these risk factors, adjusted for study, age, phase of menstrual cycle, and body-mass index (BMI). All statistical tests were two-sided. FINDINGS:We included data for up to 767 women with breast cancer and 1699 controls in the risk analyses. Breast cancer risk was associated with a doubling in concentrations of oestradiol (OR 1·19, 95% CI 1·06-1·35), calculated free oestradiol (1·17, 1·03-1·33), oestrone (1·27, 1·05-1·54), androstenedione (1·30, 1·10-1·55), dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate (1·17, 1·04-1·32), testosterone (1·18, 1·03-1·35), and calculated free testosterone (1·08, 0·97-1·21). Breast cancer risk was not associated with luteal phase progesterone (doubling in concentration OR 1·00, 95% CI 0·92-1·09), and adjustment for other factors had little effect on any of these ORs. Cross-sectional analyses in control women showed several associations of sex hormones with breast cancer risk factors. INTERPRETATION:Circulating oestrogens and androgens are positively associated with the risk for breast cancer in premenopausal women.

Project description:BackgroundMenarche 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.MethodsIndividual 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.FindingsBreast 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).InterpretationThe 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.FundingCancer Research UK.

Project description:BackgroundOnly about half the studies that have collected information on the relevance of women's height and body mass index to their risk of developing ovarian cancer have published their results, and findings are inconsistent. Here, we bring together the worldwide evidence, published and unpublished, and describe these relationships.Methods and findingsIndividual data on 25,157 women with ovarian cancer and 81,311 women without ovarian cancer from 47 epidemiological studies were collected, checked, and analysed centrally. Adjusted relative risks of ovarian cancer were calculated, by height and by body mass index. Ovarian cancer risk increased significantly with height and with body mass index, except in studies using hospital controls. For other study designs, the relative risk of ovarian cancer per 5 cm increase in height was 1.07 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.09; p<0.001); this relationship did not vary significantly by women's age, year of birth, education, age at menarche, parity, menopausal status, smoking, alcohol consumption, having had a hysterectomy, having first degree relatives with ovarian or breast cancer, use of oral contraceptives, or use of menopausal hormone therapy. For body mass index, there was significant heterogeneity (p<0.001) in the findings between ever-users and never-users of menopausal hormone therapy, but not by the 11 other factors listed above. The relative risk for ovarian cancer per 5 kg/m(2) increase in body mass index was 1.10 (95% CI, 1.07-1.13; p<0.001) in never-users and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.92-0.99; p=0.02) in ever-users of hormone therapy.ConclusionsOvarian cancer is associated with height and, among never-users of hormone therapy, with body mass index. In high-income countries, both height and body mass index have been increasing in birth cohorts now developing the disease. If all other relevant factors had remained constant, then these increases in height and weight would be associated with a 3% increase in ovarian cancer incidence per decade. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Although diagnosed less often, breast cancer in African American women (AAW) displays different characteristics compared to breast cancer in Caucasian women (CW), including earlier onset, less favorable clinical outcome, and an aggressive tumor phenotype. These disparities may be attributed to differences in socioeconomic factors such as access to health care, lifestyle, including increased frequency of obesity in AAW, and tumor biology, especially the higher frequency of triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) in young AAW. Improved understanding of the etiology and molecular characteristics of TNBC in AAW is critical to determining whether and how TNBC contributes to survival disparities in AAW. METHODS: Demographic, pathological and survival data from AAW (n = 62) and CW (n = 98) with TNBC were analyzed using chi-square analysis, Student's t-tests, and log-rank tests. Frozen tumor specimens were available from 57 of the TNBC patients (n = 23 AAW; n = 34 CW); RNA was isolated after laser microdissection of tumor cells and was hybridized to HG U133A 2.0 microarrays. Data were analyzed using ANOVA with FDR <0.05, >2-fold difference defining significance. RESULTS: The frequency of TNBC compared to all BC was significantly higher in AAW (28%) compared to CW (12%), however, significant survival and pathological differences were not detected between populations. Gene expression analysis revealed the tumors were more similar than different at the molecular level, with only CRYBB2P1, a pseudogene, differentially expressed between populations. Among demographic characteristics, AAW consumed significantly lower amounts of caffeine and alcohol, were less likely to breastfeed and more likely to be obese. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that TNBC in AAW is not a unique disease compared to TNBC in CW. Rather, higher frequency of TNBC in AAW may, in part, be attributable to the effects of lifestyle choices. Because these risk factors are modifiable, they provide new opportunities for the development of risk reduction strategies that may decrease mortality by preventing the development of TNBC in AAW.

Project description:Background:Biennial screening is generally recommended for average-risk women aged 50 to 74 years, but tailored screening may provide greater benefits. Objective:To estimate outcomes for various screening intervals after age 50 years based on breast density and risk for breast cancer. Design:Collaborative simulation modeling using national incidence, breast density, and screening performance data. Setting:United States. Patients:Women aged 50 years or older with various combinations of breast density and relative risk (RR) of 1.0, 1.3, 2.0, or 4.0. Intervention:Annual, biennial, or triennial digital mammography screening from ages 50 to 74 years (vs. no screening) and ages 65 to 74 years (vs. biennial digital mammography from ages 50 to 64 years). Measurements:Lifetime breast cancer deaths, life expectancy and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), false-positive mammograms, benign biopsy results, overdiagnosis, cost-effectiveness, and ratio of false-positive results to breast cancer deaths averted. Results:Screening benefits and overdiagnosis increase with breast density and RR. False-positive mammograms and benign results on biopsy decrease with increasing risk. Among women with fatty breasts or scattered fibroglandular density and an RR of 1.0 or 1.3, breast cancer deaths averted were similar for triennial versus biennial screening for both age groups (50 to 74 years, median of 3.4 to 5.1 vs. 4.1 to 6.5 deaths averted; 65 to 74 years, median of 1.5 to 2.1 vs. 1.8 to 2.6 deaths averted). Breast cancer deaths averted increased with annual versus biennial screening for women aged 50 to 74 years at all levels of breast density and an RR of 4.0, and those aged 65 to 74 years with heterogeneously or extremely dense breasts and an RR of 4.0. However, harms were almost 2-fold higher. Triennial screening for the average-risk subgroup and annual screening for the highest-risk subgroup cost less than $100 000 per QALY gained. Limitation:Models did not consider women younger than 50 years, those with an RR less than 1, or other imaging methods. Conclusion:Average-risk women with low breast density undergoing triennial screening and higher-risk women with high breast density receiving annual screening will maintain a similar or better balance of benefits and harms than average-risk women receiving biennial screening. Primary Funding Source:National Cancer Institute.

Project description:BackgroundPublished findings on breast cancer risk associated with different types of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) are inconsistent, with limited information on long-term effects. We bring together the epidemiological evidence, published and unpublished, on these associations, and review the relevant randomised evidence.MethodsPrincipal analyses used individual participant data from all eligible prospective studies that had sought information on the type and timing of MHT use; the main analyses are of individuals with complete information on this. Studies were identified by searching many formal and informal sources regularly from Jan 1, 1992, to Jan 1, 2018. Current users were included up to 5 years (mean 1·4 years) after last-reported MHT use. Logistic regression yielded adjusted risk ratios (RRs) comparing particular groups of MHT users versus never users.FindingsDuring prospective follow-up, 108 647 postmenopausal women developed breast cancer at mean age 65 years (SD 7); 55 575 (51%) had used MHT. Among women with complete information, mean MHT duration was 10 years (SD 6) in current users and 7 years (SD 6) in past users, and mean age was 50 years (SD 5) at menopause and 50 years (SD 6) at starting MHT. Every MHT type, except vaginal oestrogens, was associated with excess breast cancer risks, which increased steadily with duration of use and were greater for oestrogen-progestagen than oestrogen-only preparations. Among current users, these excess risks were definite even during years 1-4 (oestrogen-progestagen RR 1·60, 95% CI 1·52-1·69; oestrogen-only RR 1·17, 1·10-1·26), and were twice as great during years 5-14 (oestrogen-progestagen RR 2·08, 2·02-2·15; oestrogen-only RR 1·33, 1·28-1·37). The oestrogen-progestagen risks during years 5-14 were greater with daily than with less frequent progestagen use (RR 2·30, 2·21-2·40 vs 1·93, 1·84-2·01; heterogeneity p<0·0001). For a given preparation, the RRs during years 5-14 of current use were much greater for oestrogen-receptor-positive tumours than for oestrogen-receptor-negative tumours, were similar for women starting MHT at ages 40-44, 45-49, 50-54, and 55-59 years, and were attenuated by starting after age 60 years or by adiposity (with little risk from oestrogen-only MHT in women who were obese). After ceasing MHT, some excess risk persisted for more than 10 years; its magnitude depended on the duration of previous use, with little excess following less than 1 year of MHT use.InterpretationIf these associations are largely causal, then for women of average weight in developed countries, 5 years of MHT, starting at age 50 years, would increase breast cancer incidence at ages 50-69 years by about one in every 50 users of oestrogen plus daily progestagen preparations; one in every 70 users of oestrogen plus intermittent progestagen preparations; and one in every 200 users of oestrogen-only preparations. The corresponding excesses from 10 years of MHT would be about twice as great.FundingCancer Research UK and the Medical Research Council.

Dataset Information

Alcohol, tobacco and breast cancer--collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 58,515 women with breast cancer and 95,067 women without the disease.

Publications

Alcohol, tobacco and breast cancer--collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 58,515 women with breast cancer and 95,067 women without the disease.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets