Sedentary work and breast cancer risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Objectives
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess sedentary work's contribution to breast cancer risk quantitatively using thorough research articles.Methods
We performed a meta-analysis using a registered protocol in PROSPERO (registration number: CRD42020204629). Literature from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane involving sedentary work and breast cancer risk was reviewed. We calculated the overall pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CI with a random-effect model from the included studies. Furthermore, we performed stratified analyses by characteristics of studies.Results
Thirty-one studies (13 cohort studies and 18 case-control studies) were included in the analysis. The overall effect of the pooled analysis was an RR of 1.16 (95% CI 1.08-1.23). The results were 1.20 (95% CI 1.10-1.30) and 1.12 (95% CI 1.02-1.23) for cohort and case-control studies. The effect of sedentary work did not seem to be consistently attenuated by controlling body mass index, menopausal status, or experience of hormone replacement therapy.Conclusion
The results from this meta-analysis suggest that sedentary behavior within the occupational domain was associated with a 15.5% increased risk of breast cancer. It is essential to reduce the sedentary time spent at work and to secure time for leisure-time physical activity among sedentary workers as a primary preventive measure.
SUBMITTER: Lee J
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8221371 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified shift work as a possible human carcinogen. The results of systematic on this topic is contradictory. This systematic review and meta-analysis, therefore, aimed to update the current evidence regarding the relationship between night-shift work duration and breast cancer risk.MethodsPubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus as well as reference list of included studies were searched until December 19, 2020. Observational case-control or cohort studies investigating the relationship between the duration of night-shift work and breast cancer in women were included, which all quantified night-shift work exposure. All statistical analyses were done by Stata version 11.2.ResultsOur literature search was resulted in retrieval of 4854 publications from which 26 eligible studies with 1,313,348 participants were included in the meta-analyses. The pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of breast cancer for short-term night-shift workers (< 10 years) was 1.13 (95% CI 1.03-1.24, p = 0.008, I2 = 71.3%), and for long-term night-shift workers (≥ 10 years) was 1.08 (95% CI 0.99-1.17, p = 0.09, I2 = 42.2%), with moderate to substantial statistical heterogeneity observed in both analyses. The results of subgroup analysis showed that flight attendants with long overnight flights were at an elevated risk of breast cancer, but unmeasured confounders limited these results. The risk of breast cancer in case control studies, adjusted for reproductive factors and family history of breast cancer as well as studies with high quality was increased in both short term and long term night-shift workers.ConclusionsThis systematic review found a positive statistical relationship between night work and breast cancer risk in short-term night-shift workers but no increase was observed in the long-term night-shift workers.
| S-EPMC7927396 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sedentary behaviour is an emerging risk factor for several site-specific cancers. Ovarian cancers are often detected at late disease stages and the role of sedentary behaviour as a modifiable risk factor potentially contributing to ovarian cancer risk has not been extensively examined. We systematically searched relevant databases from inception to February 2020 for eligible publications dealing with sedentary behaviour in relation to ovarian cancer risk. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis, calculating summary relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. We calculated the E-Value, a sensitivity analysis for unmeasured confounding. We tested for publication bias and heterogeneity. Seven studies (three prospective cohort studies and four case-control studies) including 2060 ovarian cancer cases were analysed. Comparing highest versus lowest levels of sedentary behaviour, the data indicated a statistically significant increase in the risk of ovarian cancer in relation to prolonged sitting time (RR = 1.29, 95% CI = 1.07-1.57). Sub-analyses of prospective cohort studies (RR = 1.33, 95% CI = 0.92-1.93) and case-control studies (RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 0.98-1.68) showed statistically non-significant results. Sensitivity analysis showed that an unmeasured confounder would need to be related to sedentary behaviour and ovarian cancer with a RR of 1.90 to fully explain away the observed RR of 1.29. Our analyses showed a statistically significant positive association between sedentary behaviour and ovarian cancer risk.
| S-EPMC8417015 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Shift work with circadian disruption has been considered as a carcinogenic risk factor for skin cancer. The few prior studies that investigated the association between shift work and skin cancer have inconclusive results. Our main objective was to evaluate the associations between shift work and the risks of different types of skin cancer. We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, EMBASE and Science Direct until October 2018 for studies that included a relationship between shift work and skin cancer. Our search yielded 193 articles and 9 studies met the criteria for our review. The included studies involved 3,579,147 participants and 17,308 skin cancer cases. Overall, ever shift work, was associated with increased risk of melanoma (RR?=?1.10, 95% CI?=?1.05-1.16) and a significant decrease in the risk of BCC (RR?=?0.90, 95% CI?=?0.88-0.93). No association between shift work and the risk of SCC was detected. Interestingly, our dose response analysis demonstrated that the risk of melanoma cumulatively increases by 2% for every year of shift work (RR?=?1.02; 95% CI?=?1.00-1.03). In conclusion, shift work is associated with increased risk of melanoma and deceased risk of BCC. Further studies are needed to confirm our findings and to elucidate the related potential biological mechanisms.
| S-EPMC7005031 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Nightshift work introduces light at night and causes circadian rhythm among night workers, who are considered to be at increased risk of cancer. However, in the last 2 years, nine population-based studies reported insignificant associations between night-shift work and cancer risks. We aimed to conduct an updated systematic review and meta-analysis to ascertain the effect of night-shift work on the incidence of cancers. Methods: Our protocol was registered in PROSPERO and complied with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science databases were used to comprehensively search studies published up to May 31, 2019. The random-effect model (Der Simonian-Laird method) was carried out to combine the risk estimates of night-shift work for cancers. The dose-response meta-analysis was performed to verify whether the association was in a dose-dependent manner. Results: Our literature searching retrieved 1,660 publications. Included in the meta-analyses were 57 eligible studies with 8,477,849 participants (mean age 55 years; 2,560,886 men, 4,220,154 women, and 1,696,809 not mentioned). The pooled results showed that night-shift work was not associated with the risk of breast cancer (OR = 1.009, 95% CI = 0.984-1.033), prostate cancer (OR = 1.027, 95% CI = 0.982-1.071), ovarian cancer (OR = 1.027, 95% CI = 0.942-1.113), pancreatic cancer (OR = 1.007, 95% CI = 0.910-1.104), colorectal cancer (OR = 1.016, 95% CI = 0.964-1.068), non-Hodgkin's lymph (OR = 1.046, 95% CI = 0.994-1.098), and stomach cancer (OR = 1.064, 95% CI = 0.971-1.157), while night-shift work was associated with a reduction of lung cancer (OR = 0.949, 95% CI = 0.903-0.996), and skin cancer (OR = 0.916, 95% CI = 0.879-0.953). The dose-response meta-analysis found that cancer risk was not significantly elevated with the increased light exposure of night- shift work. Conclusion: This systematic review of 57 observational studies did not find an overall association between ever-exposure to night-shift work and the risk of breast, prostate ovarian, pancreatic, colorectal, non-Hodgkin's lymph, and stomach cancers.
| S-EPMC7324664 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This systematic review discusses long-term NSW and female BC risk, with special attention to differences between pre- and postmenopausal BC, to test the association with recent NSW. The review follows PRISMA guidelines (Prospero registry: CRD42018102515). We searched PubMed, Embase, and WOS for case-control, nested case-control, and cohort studies addressing long-term NSW (≥15 years) as risk exposure and female BC as outcome until 31 December 2020. Risk of bias was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Eighteen studies were finally included (eight cohorts; five nested case-control; five case-control). We performed meta-analyses on long-term NSW and BC risk; overall and by menopausal status; a subanalysis on recent long-term NSW, based on studies involving predominantly women below retirement age; and a dose-response meta-analysis on NSW duration. The pooled estimate for long-term NSW and BC was 1.13 (95%CI = 1.01-1.27; 18 studies, I2 = 56.8%, p = 0.002). BC risk increased 4.7% per 10 years of NSW (95%CI = 0.94-1.09; 16 studies, I2 = 33.4%, p = 0.008). The pooled estimate for premenopausal BC was 1.27 (95%CI = 0.96-1.68; six studies, I2 = 32.0%, p = 0.196) and for postmenopausal BC 1.05 (95%CI = 0.90-1.24,I2 = 52.4%; seven studies, p = 0.050). For recent long-term exposure, the pooled estimate was 1.23 (95%CI = 1.06-1.42; 15 studies; I2 = 48.4%, p = 0.018). Our results indicate that long-term NSW increases the risk for BC and that menopausal status and time since exposure might be relevant.
| S-EPMC8657038 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundNight-shift work is suggested to be associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, but its association with prostate cancer is still controversial. We examined this association by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis.MethodsStudies were identified by searching PubMed, EMBASE, Ovid, Web of Science, the Cochrane register, and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure databases through December 25, 2014. Summary relative risks (SRRs) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random effects or fixed effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were also evaluated.ResultsA total of 2,459,845 individuals from eight published studies were included in this meta-analysis. Analysis of all studies suggested that night-shift work was associated with a significantly increased risk of prostate cancer (RR: 1.24, 95% CI: 1.05-1.46; P=0.011). Sensitivity analysis showed that the association remained significant when repeating the analysis after removing one study each time. Dose-response meta-analysis suggested that an increase in night-shift work of 5 years duration was statistically significantly associated with a 2.8% (95% CI: 0.3, 5.4%, P=0.030) increase in the risk of prostate cancer. There was no significant publication bias.ConclusionBased on a meta-analysis, night-shift work is associated with an increased risk of prostate cancer. Because of the limited number of included studies and the large level of heterogeneity, further well-designed studies are still warranted to confirm the findings of our analysis.
| S-EPMC4599640 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives Mammographic density is a well-defined risk factor for breast cancer and having extremely dense breast tissue is associated with a one-to six-fold increased risk of breast cancer. However, it is questioned whether this increased risk estimate is applicable to current breast density classification methods. Therefore, the aim of this study was to further investigate and clarify the association between mammographic density and breast cancer risk based on current literature. Methods Medline, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched for articles published since 2013, that used BI-RADS lexicon 5th edition and incorporated data on digital mammography. Crude and maximally confounder-adjusted data were pooled in odds ratios (ORs) using random-effects models. Heterogeneity regarding breast cancer risks were investigated using I2 statistic, stratified and sensitivity analyses. Results Nine observational studies were included. Having extremely dense breast tissue (BI-RADS density D) resulted in a 2.11-fold (95% CI 1.84–2.42) increased breast cancer risk compared to having scattered dense breast tissue (BI-RADS density B). Sensitivity analysis showed that when only using data that had adjusted for age and BMI, the breast cancer risk was 1.83-fold (95% CI 1.52–2.21) increased. Both results were statistically significant and homogenous. Conclusions Mammographic breast density BI-RADS D is associated with an approximately two-fold increased risk of breast cancer compared to having BI-RADS density B in general population women. This is a novel and lower risk estimate compared to previously reported and might be explained due to the use of digital mammography and BI-RADS lexicon 5th edition. Highlights • So far, breast density was linked to a one-to sixfold increased breast cancer risk.• Prior risk estimates were based on old BI-RADS lexicon and screen-film mammography.• We included only studies using digital mammography and BI-RADS lexicon 5th edition.• Breast density D is associated with a two-fold increased risk of breast cancer.• This is a lower risk estimate compared to previously reported studies.
| S-EPMC9530665 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:A protective relationship has been hypothesized between exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR) and the development of breast cancer. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies examining the association of exposure to solar UVR and breast cancer risk. METHODS:We searched Medline, EMBASE, and Web of Science for all studies investigating exposure to solar UVR and breast cancer risk. Separate analyses were performed using estimates of time spent in the sun, and ambient UVR. Associations were estimated using DerSimonian and Laird random-effect models. Heterogeneity was investigated through subgroup analyses and I2 statistics. RESULTS:Fourteen studies were included in the review and 13 in the meta-analysis, with the majority (n=8) conducted in North America. We observed a decreased risk of breast cancer for individuals spending ?1h/d in the sun during summer months over a lifetime or usual adulthood compared with <1h/d [pooled?relative?risk?(RR)=0.84; 95% CI: 0.77, 0.91]. Spending ?2h/d in the sun had a similar protective effect as 1 to <2h/d when compared with <1h/d (RR=0.83; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.93 vs. 0.83; 95% CI: 0.78, 0.89). Exposure during adolescence was suggestive of a lower risk of breast cancer than exposure later in life (?45?years of age) (RR=0.83; 95% CI: 0.71, 0.98 vs. 0.97; 95% CI: 0.85, 1.11). Ambient UVR was not associated with the risk of breast cancer (RR=1.00; 95% CI: 0.93, 1.09). DISCUSSION:To our knowledge, this was the first meta-analysis to estimate the risk of developing breast cancer associated with time spent in the sun. The results suggest that obtaining greater than an hour a day in the sun during the summer months could decrease the risk of developing breast cancer. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP4861.
| S-EPMC7015554 | biostudies-literature
Project description:6-Sulfatoxymelatonin (aMT6s) is the main metabolite of melatonin in urine, and is a reliable surrogate biomarker reflecting the blood melatonin concentration. This meta-analysis assessed the association between urinary aMT6s level and BC incidence. The electronic databases PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were searched. Risk ratios (RRs) were adopted to estimate the relative BC incidence. A total of 7 prospective case-control publications were included, and 6 of them were distinct studies. Pooled analysis of data from the 6 studies involving 1824 women with incident BC and 3954 matched control participants with no overlapping of subjects among studies indicated no significant association between the highest levels of urinary aMT6s and the incidence of BC (RR?=?0.97, 95% CI, 0.88-1.08, P?=?0.56). Negative associations were observed in postmenopausal women (RR?=?0.88, 95% CI, 0.75-1.02, P?=?0.10), estrogen receptor positive BC (RR?=?0.83, 95% CI, 0.64-1.07, P?=?0.15), and studies using 12-hour overnight urine (RR?=?0.81, 95% CI, 0.61-1.07, P?=?0.13), all with borderline significances. Lag time or invasive degree did not interfere with the results. There was no evident publication bias detected by the Egger's test and the funnel plot. Conclusively, the current evidence did not support a significant association between urinary aMT6s level and BC risk.
| S-EPMC5509698 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Based on previous studies, it has been hypothesized that tube sterilization may be associated with a lower risk of breast cancer. This study aims to investigate the relationship between tubal ligation and the risk of breast cancer through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods In this systematic review and meta-analysis, PubMed/Medline, Web of Science, Scopus, and Google Scholar were searched for relevant non randomized studies published up to November 2020. Then, we screened the papers to include the eligible papers in the meta-analysis. Finally, we pooled the extracted results of individual studies to estimate the summary effect size. All analyses were done using Stata software version 13 (Stata Corp, College Station, TX). Results Four hundred sixty-four papers were retrieved from PubMed/Medline (160), Scopus (165), and Web of Science (139), and 21 papers from Google Scholar and manual search of references in selected full texts. After the removal of duplicates and screening of the papers, 11 articles (6 cohort and 5 case-control study) were included in the final analysis. The results of cohort (RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.97–1.0, I2 = 21.1%) and case control studies (OR = 0.87, 95% CI = 0.62–1.12, I2 = 88.9%) revealed that tubal ligation was not significantly associated with breast cancer risk. Conclusion According to our findings, tubal ligation cannot be considered as a risk factor associated with breast cancer risk. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13643-022-02000-8.
| S-EPMC9208107 | biostudies-literature