Dataset Information

Breast cancer risk factor associations differ for pure versus invasive carcinoma with an in situ component in case-control and case-case analyses.

ABSTRACT: Invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) is diagnosed with or without a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component. Previous analyses have found significant differences in tumor characteristics between pure IDC lacking DCIS and mixed IDC with DCIS. We will test our hypothesis that pure IDC represents a form of breast cancer with etiology and risk factors distinct from mixed IDC/DCIS.We compared reproductive risk factors for breast cancer risk, as well as family and smoking history between 831 women with mixed IDC/DCIS (n = 650) or pure IDC (n = 181), and 1,620 controls, in the context of the Women's Circle of Health Study (WCHS), a case-control study of breast cancer in African-American and European-American women. Data on reproductive and lifestyle factors were collected during interviews, and tumor characteristics were abstracted from pathology reports. Case-control and case-case analyses were conducted using unconditional logistic regression.Most risk factors were similarly associated with pure IDC and mixed IDC/DCIS. However, among postmenopausal women, risk of pure IDC was lower in women with body mass index (BMI) 25 to <30 [odds ratio (OR) 0.66; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.35-1.23] and BMI ? 30 (OR 0.33; 95 % CI 0.18-0.67) compared to women with BMI < 25, with no associations with mixed IDC/DCIS. In case-case analyses, women who breastfed up to 12 months (OR 0.55; 95 % CI 0.32-0.94) or longer (OR 0.47; 95 % CI 0.26-0.87) showed decreased odds of pure IDC than mixed IDC/DCIS compared to those who did not breastfeed.Associations with some breast cancer risk factors differed between mixed IDC/DCIS and pure IDC, potentially suggesting differential developmental pathways. These findings, if confirmed in a larger study, will provide a better understanding of the developmental patterns of breast cancer and the influence of modifiable risk factors, which in turn could lead to better preventive measures for pure IDC, which have worse disease prognosis compared to mixed IDC/DCIS.

SUBMITTER: Ruszczyk M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4724280 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Breast cancer risk factor associations differ for pure versus invasive carcinoma with an in situ component in case-control and case-case analyses.

Ruszczyk Melanie M Zirpoli Gary G Kumar Shicha S Bandera Elisa V EV Bovbjerg Dana H DH Jandorf Lina L Khoury Thaer T Hwang Helena H Ciupak Gregory G Pawlish Karen K Schedin Pepper P Masso-Welch Patricia P Ambrosone Christine B CB Hong Chi-Chen CC

Cancer causes & control : CCC 20151130 2

<h4>Purpose</h4>Invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) is diagnosed with or without a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component. Previous analyses have found significant differences in tumor characteristics between pure IDC lacking DCIS and mixed IDC with DCIS. We will test our hypothesis that pure IDC represents a form of breast cancer with etiology and risk factors distinct from mixed IDC/DCIS.<h4>Methods</h4>We compared reproductive risk factors for breast cancer risk, as well as family and smoking ...[more]

PMID: 26621543

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundImpact of immeasurable time bias (IMTB) is yet to be examined in self-controlled designs.MethodsWe conducted case-crossover, case-time-control, and case-case-time-control analyses using Korea's healthcare database. Two empirical examples among elderly patients were used: 1) benzodiazepines-hip fracture; 2) benzodiazepines-mortality. For cases, the date of hip fracture diagnosis or death was defined as the index date, and the inherited date of their matched cases for controls or future cases. Exposure was assessed in the 1-30 day (hazard) and 61-90 day (control) windows preceding the index date. A non-missing exposure setting included in- and outpatient prescriptions and the pseudo-outpatient setting included only the outpatients. Conditional logistic regression was done to estimate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), where the relative difference in OR among the two settings was calculated to quantify the IMTB.ResultsThe IMTB had negligible impacts in the hip fracture example in the case-crossover (non-missing exposure setting OR 1.27; 95% CI, 1.12-1.44; pseudo-outpatient setting OR 1.21; 95% CI, 1.06-1.39; magnitude 0.05), case-time-control (OR 1.18; 95% CI, 0.98-1.44; OR 1.13; 95% CI, 0.92-1.38; 0.04, respectively), and case-case-time-control analyses (OR 0.99; 95% CI, 0.80-1.23; OR 0.94; 95% CI, 0.75-1.18; 0.05, respectively). In the mortality example, IMTB had significant impacts in the case-crossover (non-missing exposure setting OR 1.44; 95% CI, 1.36-1.52; pseudo-outpatient setting OR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.67-0.78; magnitude 1.00), case-time-control (OR 1.38; 95% CI, 1.26-1.51; OR 0.68; 95% CI, 0.61-0.76; 1.03, respectively), and case-case-time-control analyses (OR 1.27; 95% CI, 1.15-1.40; OR 0.62; 95% CI, 0.55-0.69; 1.05, respectively).ConclusionAlthough IMTB had negligible impacts on the drug's effect on acute events, as these are unlikely to be accompanied with hospitalizations, it negatively biased the drug's effect on mortality, an outcome with prodromal phases, in the three self-controlled designs.

Dataset Information

Breast cancer risk factor associations differ for pure versus invasive carcinoma with an in situ component in case-control and case-case analyses.

Publications

Breast cancer risk factor associations differ for pure versus invasive carcinoma with an in situ component in case-control and case-case analyses.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets