Epidemiology and Prevention of Breast Cancer

Colditz, Graham A.

doi:10.1158/1055-9965.epi-04-0157

Cited by 62 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 40 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Its potential importance in breast carcinogenesis is due to the fact that 25(OH)D can be metabolized to 1,25(OH) 2 Dietary and Supplemental Calcium Intake. The majority of studies on calcium intake and breast cancer risk published to date have been case-control studies (Table 3).…”

Section: Anticarcinogenic Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given the magnitude of the problem, considerable effort has been devoted to elucidation of the etiology of breast cancer. Indeed, many factors have been related to altered breast cancer risk, including certain menstrual (age at menarche and age at menopause), reproductive (childbearing and lactation), and anthropometric [body mass index (BMI) and weight gain] factors as well as exogenous estrogen use, endogenous hormone levels, family history of breast cancer, history of benign breast disease (BBD), ionizing radiation, and alcohol consumption (2,3). However, because these factors do not fully explain the epidemiology of breast cancer, identification of additional avenues of etiologic investigation is warranted.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Vitamin D, Calcium, and Breast Cancer Risk: A Review

Cui

Rohan

2006

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

156

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vitamin D and calcium are metabolically interrelated and highly correlated dietary factors. Experimental studies have shown their anticarcinogenic effects due to their participation in regulating cell proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis in normal and malignant breast cells. Given the emerging interest in their potential roles in the etiology of breast cancer, we review the current epidemiologic literature on dietary and/or supplemental intakes of vitamin D, endogenous circulating levels of vitamin D, and dietary and/or supplemental intakes of calcium in relation to breast cancer risk. To place these studies in context, we also provide a brief review of other supporting epidemiologic evidence. Despite inconsistent results from the epidemiologic studies, several lines of evidence suggest that vitamin D and calcium may be involved in the development of breast cancer. Specifically, (a) there is some epidemiologic evidence for inverse associations between vitamin D and calcium intakes and breast cancer; (b) serum, plasma, and/or blood levels of vitamin D metabolites have been inversely associated with breast cancer risk in some studies; (c) high sunlight exposure, presumably reflecting vitamin D synthesis in the skin, has been associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer; (d)

show abstract

Section: Anticarcinogenic Propertiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vitamin D, Calcium, and Breast Cancer Risk: A Review

Cui

Rohan

2006

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

156

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is hypothesized that breast cancer risk increases with greater cumulative exposure to estrogen [1] and related increase in rate of breast tissue aging [2]. Menstrual and reproductive factors that are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer because they may increase lifetime exposure to estrogen include: earlier age at menarche, shorter menstrual cycle length, and later age at menopause [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Menstrual and reproductive factors in relation to mammographic density: the Study of Women’s Health Across the Nation (SWAN)

Butler¹,

Gold²,

Greendale

et al. 2007

Breast Cancer Res Treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Menstrual and reproductive factors may increase breast cancer risk through a pathway that includes increased mammographic density. We assessed whether known or suspected menstrual and reproductive breast cancer risk factors were cross-sectionally associated with mammographic density, by measuring area of radiographic density and total breast area on mammograms from 801 participants in the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN), a multi-ethnic cohort of pre-and early perimenopausal women. From multivariable linear regression, the following menstrual or reproductive factors were independently associated with percent mammographic density (area of dense breast/breast area): older age at menarche (β = 10.3, P < 0.01, for >13 vs. <12 years), premenstrual cravings and bloating (β = −3.36, P = 0.02), younger age at first full-term birth (β = −8.12, P < 0.01 for ≤23 years versus no births), greater number of births (β = −6.80, P < 0.01 for ≥3 births versus no births), and premenopausal status (β = 3.78, P < 0.01 versus early perimenopausal). Only number of births remained associated with percent density after adjustment for age, race/ ethnicity, study site, body mass index (BMI), and smoking. In addition, stratified analyses revealed that the association with number of births was confined to women within the lowest BMI tertile (β = −12.2, P < 0.01 for ≥3 births versus no births). Our data support a mechanism for parity and breast cancer that involves mammographic density among pre-and early perimenopausal women that may be modified by body size.

show abstract

“…Between these two milestones, breast tissue is largely undifferentiated and is thus particularly susceptible to carcinogenic insults (3). It is well established that pregnancy, particularly pregnancy at a young age, reduces the risk of breast cancer (4), and this is primarily because of the differentiation of breast tissue that occurs during pregnancy (5). Circulating hormones released during the menstrual cycle can have a greater effect on the promotion of breast abnormalities on the nulliparous, relatively undifferentiated breast compared with the parous breast (4).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is well established that pregnancy, particularly pregnancy at a young age, reduces the risk of breast cancer (4), and this is primarily because of the differentiation of breast tissue that occurs during pregnancy (5). Circulating hormones released during the menstrual cycle can have a greater effect on the promotion of breast abnormalities on the nulliparous, relatively undifferentiated breast compared with the parous breast (4). Thus, the longer the interval between menarche and first birth, an interval Russo et al (5) have described as a "window of high susceptibility," the more a woman's breast tissue is particularly susceptible to carcinogens.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Timing of Menarche and First Birth in Relation to Risk of Breast Cancer in A-Bomb Survivors

McDougall

Sakata

Sugiyama

et al. 2010

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The length of the interval between age at menarche and age at first birth is positively associated with breast cancer risk. We examined the risk of breast cancer in atomic bomb survivors to investigate whether women exposed to radiation between menarche and first birth had a higher risk of radiogenic breast cancer than women exposed at the same age but outside this interval.Methods: Women (n = 30,113) were classified into three reproductive status at the time of the bombings (ATB) categories (premenarche, between menarche and first birth, or after first birth). Poisson regression was used to test the primary hypothesis.Results: When the background rate of breast cancer was taken to depend on city, age ATB, and attained age only, the radiation-related excess relative risk (ERR) varied significantly among the three categories (P = 0.049). However, after controlling for significant heterogeneity in the baseline risk of breast cancer between reproductive status ATB groups (P < 0.001), no significant heterogeneity (P = 0.88) was observed in the ERR, with an ERR per Gy of 1.36 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.54-2.75] for women exposed between menarche and first birth ATB, and 1.07 (95% CI, 0.22-3.62) and 1.53 (95% CI, 0.63-2.90) for those exposed premenarche or after first birth, respectively.Conclusions: The radiation-associated risk of breast cancer does not vary significantly by reproductive status ATB.Impact: It is possible that radiation exerts similar carcinogenic effects on the breast regardless of its stage of differentiation, or that the differences in radiosensitivity are too small to be detected in this cohort. Cancer

show abstract

Epidemiology and Prevention of Breast Cancer

Cited by 62 publications

References 40 publications

Vitamin D, Calcium, and Breast Cancer Risk: A Review

Vitamin D, Calcium, and Breast Cancer Risk: A Review

Menstrual and reproductive factors in relation to mammographic density: the Study of Women’s Health Across the Nation (SWAN)

Timing of Menarche and First Birth in Relation to Risk of Breast Cancer in A-Bomb Survivors

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About