High Birthweight as a Predictor of Prostate Cancer Risk

Tibblin, Gösta; Eriksson, Margaretha; Cnattingius, Sven; Ekbom, Anders

doi:10.1097/00001648-199507000-00017

Cited by 104 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…15 The lack of association with prostate cancer was also found in 3 other studies, [16][17][18] but not in a smaller study (21 cases) where 5-fold differences in rates were found. 19 For prostate cancer, 2 different studies have found lower risk with longer 17 and shorter 16 gestation, but neither specifically reported a U-shaped association, of which there was weak evidence in our study. The (linear) raised risk of digestive cancers and of its constituent sites with larger birth size found here was consistent with findings from a retrospective cohort of women, 9 but J-shaped associations have been reported for colorectal cancer in the EPIC Norfolk study.…”

Section: Comparisons With Other Studiescontrasting

confidence: 83%

Birth characteristics and adult cancer incidence: Swedish cohort of over 11,000 men and women

McCormack

dos‐Santos‐Silva

Koupil

et al. 2005

Intl Journal of Cancer

120

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Associations between larger size at birth and increased rates of adult cancer have been proposed but few empirical studies have examined this hypothesis. We investigated overall and site-specific cancer incidence in relation to birth characteristics in a Swedish population-based cohort of 11,166 singletons born in 1915-1929 for whom we have detailed obstetric data and who were alive in 1960. A total of 2,685 first primary cancers were registered during follow-up from 1960 to 2001. A standard deviation (SD) increase in birth weight for gestational age (GA) was associated with (sexadjusted) increases of 13% (95% CI = 0.03-0.23) in the rates of digestive cancers and of 17% (95% CI = 0.01-0.35) in the rates of lymphatic cancers. Women who had higher birth weights also had increased rates of breast cancer under age 50 years (by 39% per SD increase; 95% CI = 0.09-0.79), but reduced rates (by 24%; 95% CI = 0.07-0.38) of endometrial (corpus uteri) cancer at all ages. There was no evidence of associations with other cancer sites. For overall cancer incidence, men had an 8% increased risk at all ages per SD increase in birth weight for GA while women only had an increased risk under age 50 years (mainly driven by the association with breast cancer). These findings provide evidence of a modest association of birth size and adult cancer risk, resulting from positive associations with a few cancer sites and a possible inverse association with endometrial cancer. ' 2005 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

show abstract

Section: Comparisons With Other Studiescontrasting

confidence: 83%

Birth characteristics and adult cancer incidence: Swedish cohort of over 11,000 men and women

McCormack

dos‐Santos‐Silva

Koupil

et al. 2005

Intl Journal of Cancer

120

115

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Indications were reported of a positive (though not significant) relationship between weight at birth and breast cancer (Ekbom et al, 1992(Ekbom et al, , 1997 as was also found in a recent British cohort (Stavola et al, 2000) and in the current study. An increased risk for prostate cancer has been found with high birth weights (Ekbom et al, 1996;Tibblin et al, 1995), 171, 191-192,196-199 29 Total cases 262 while low birth weight has been associated with testicular cancer in young adults (Brown et al, 1986). Birth order, pregnancy, toxaemia, age at menarche and pregnancy history may be risk factors for cancer (Janerich et al, 1989;Hsieh et al, 1990;Potischman and Troisi, 1999).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Size at birth, an indicator of conditions during fetal development, may be an important factor in cancer pathogenesis. Previous studies relating size at birth to adult cancer have focused on, what may be termed, hormone-related cancers, that is, breast, uterine, ovarian, prostate and testicular cancer (Brown et al, 1986;Ekbom et al, 1992Ekbom et al, , 1996Ekbom et al, , 1997Michels et al, 1996;Sanderson et al, 1996;Tibblin et al, 1995). The relation between size at birth and other adult cancers has not been reported in the literature, while among children, high birth weight has been associated with certain cancers including neuroblastoma, Wilms' tumour, leukaemia and brain tumours (Daling et al, 1984;Yeazel et al, 1997).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cancer risk in Swedish women: the relation to size at birth

et al. 2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryThe relationship between fetal growth as indicated by weight and length at birth, and cancer risk in 1080 adult Swedish women was examined. Birth factors were retrieved from original midwife records for the years 1914, 1918, 1922 and 1930, and primary cancer cases were identified by matching with national and regional cancer registries through the year 1998. A positive and statistically significant increased risk for cancer was found with increasing birth weight or birth length for all site cancer and non-hormone related cancer, defined as all cancer sites excluding breast, uterus and ovary. Addition of factors suspected to influence cancer risk, maternal proteinuria, birth order, own parity and age at menarche, did not attenuate this relation. Previously only breast cancer has been reported to be related to size at birth in adult women and this is the first study to report that cancer sites other than the major hormone-related sites may be influenced by size at birth, as measured by either weight or length at birth; these findings warrant further investigation. These reports are compiled at both the regional and national level. By means of the unique 10-digit personal number assigned to all residents of Sweden, the population study database could be matched with the cancer registries to identify primary incident cases. Date of death (from any cause) was determined by matching personal identification numbers with the Swedish Cause of Death Registry and by confirmation with parish records. Cancer cases were analysed as combined all site cancer morbidity and also divided into 'hormone-related' and 'nonhormonal' cancers and are referred to as such in the following analysis and discussion; the former comprises cancers of the breast, uterus and ovaries, the major cancer sites with a hormonal aetiology (Miller, 1978). Non-hormonal cancers, as defined here, are thus all other cancer sites. As there is evidence that cancer of the colon may be hormone-related (Potter, 1995), the defined hormone-related sites and colon cancer are also examined in combination. Cancers of the 'digestive system', ICD7 codes 150-158, are analysed separately to examine a sub-group of the 'non-hormone-related' cancers.This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Göteborg University. Statistical methodsCharacteristics of participants and non-participants were compared using a 2-sample t-test for continuous variables and chisquared test for proportions for factors which may influence cancer risk or birth outcome -maternal age, birth order of the participant, own parity (defined as number of pregnancies) and age of menarche of the participants. Birth weight and birth length were analysed as continuous variables and in population quintiles birth weight and tertiles birth length. Cox proportional hazards modelling was used to examine trend in cancer risk in relation to size at birth, treating weight and length separately, and in modelling cancer risk with consideration of covariates implicated in cancer pathogenesis: maternal p...

show abstract

“…This possible association has been studied for melanoma (Andersson et al, 2001;McCormack et al, 2005;Ahlgren et al, 2007) and other types of cancer (Le Marchand et al, 1988;Tibblin et al, 1995;Roman et al, 1997;Wanderås et al, 1998;Vatten et al, 2002;Hjalgrim et al, 2004;Nilsen et al, 2005;Michos et al, 2007). The results are inconclusive; however, there seems to be an association between birth weight and the risk for some cancer forms.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Birth weight and melanoma risk: a population-based case–control study

et al. 2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We investigated whether lower birth weight was associated with lower risk of melanoma later in life. This population-based case–control study included all incident cases of histologically verified invasive melanoma diagnosed until 31 December 2003 in the Norwegian population born between 1967 and 1986 ( n =709). The control group without malignant disease was established by random sampling from the same source population as the cases ( n =108 209). Data on birth weight, gender, mother's residence and parental age at the time of birth were collected from the Medical Birth Registry of Norway and data on cancer from the Cancer Registry of Norway. The Mantel–Haenszel test of linear trend showed no trend in risk across the birth weight categories: individuals in the highest quartile of birth weight (⩾3860 g) had an odds ratio (OR) of 1.19 (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.77–1.84) compared to individuals with birth weight <2500 g. The adjusted OR was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.52–1.26) for birth weight below 2500 g (exposed). Though not statistically significant, the results suggest that low birth weight might influence the risk of melanoma later in life.

show abstract

High Birthweight as a Predictor of Prostate Cancer Risk

Cited by 104 publications

References 0 publications

Birth characteristics and adult cancer incidence: Swedish cohort of over 11,000 men and women

Birth characteristics and adult cancer incidence: Swedish cohort of over 11,000 men and women

Cancer risk in Swedish women: the relation to size at birth

Birth weight and melanoma risk: a population-based case–control study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About