Body Size and Risk of Breast Cancer

University of Wisconsin Comprehensive Cancer Center, Madison 53706, USA.
American Journal of Epidemiology (Impact Factor: 4.98). 07/1997; 145(11):1011-9. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009057
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The relation between body size and breast cancer remains uncertain, particularly with regard to differences between pre- and postmenopausal women. The authors examined whether height, weight, body mass index, and weight change were associated with breast cancer risk among pre- and postmenopausal women. This population-based case-control study included women aged 20-74 years (n = 6,548) who were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer during 1988-1991 in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin. Similarly aged control women (n = 9,057) were selected at random from driver's license files and Health Care Financing Administration files. Height, weight, and information on other breast cancer risk factors were ascertained by telephone interview, and logistic regression was used to estimate multivariate-adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Among premenopausal women, the adjusted odds ratio for the upper quintile group of height relative to the lowest was 1.36 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.76). The heaviest premenopausal women had a lower risk (odds ratio (OR) = 0.87, 95% CI 0.70-1.10). Among postmenopausal women, the adjusted odds ratios were higher for the upper quintile categories of both height (OR = 1.27, 95% CI 1.11-1.45) and weight (OR = 1.57, 95% CI 1.37-1.79). Weight gain since ages 18 and 35 years was associated with increased postmenopausal breast cancer risk, and risk was lower in women who had lost weight. These findings suggest that programs to avoid weight gain merit study as a means to reduce risk of postmenopausal breast cancer.

Download full-text


Available from: Polly A Newcomb, Aug 24, 2015
  • Source
    • "Menopause represents a time when obesity, energy balance, circulating hormones, chemokines and cytokines, and body fat distribution are in flux, and is also the critical time when the tumor-promoting effects of obesity emerge. Obesity's impact on breast cancer prior to menopause is relatively modest and in some cases has even been shown to be protective [61]. After menopause, however, obesity increases the incidence, progression, and eventual mortality from breast cancer by up to 40% compared to women at a healthy weight [62]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The magnitude of the breast cancer problem implores researchers to aggressively investigate prevention strategies. However, several barriers currently reduce the feasibility of breast cancer prevention. These barriers include the inability to accurately predict future breast cancer diagnosis at the individual level, the need for improved understanding of when to implement interventions, uncertainty with respect to optimal duration of treatment, and negative side-effects associated with currently approved chemoprevention therapies. None-the-less, the unique biology of the mammary gland with its postnatal development and conditional terminal-differentiation may permit the resolution of many of these barriers. Specifically, lifecycle-specific windows of breast cancer risk have been identified that may be amenable to risk-reducing strategies. Here, we argue for prevention research focused on two of these lifecycle windows of risk; postpartum mammary gland involution and peri-menopause. We provide evidence that these windows are highly amenable to targeted, limited duration treatments. Such approaches could result in the prevention of postpartum and postmenopausal breast cancers, respectively.
    Experimental Cell Research 05/2013; 319(11). DOI:10.1016/j.yexcr.2013.04.018 · 3.37 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Most studies conducted with primarily White samples indicate that obesity is associated with a lower risk of premenopausal and a higher risk of postmenopausal breast cancer [13] [14] [15]. Furthermore, weight gain in adulthood contributes to increased risk of breast cancer [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] while weight loss may decrease breast cancer risk [8] [10] [11] [13]. Obesity and adult weight gain place Black women at increased risk since approximately 50% of Black female adults are obese [5]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Overall incidence of breast cancer is slightly lower, but mortality rates are higher, for Black women compared to White women. Higher body mass index (BMI), sedentary lifestyles, and lower compliance with recommended breast health behaviors may contribute to higher risk and mortality. A randomized pilot intervention trial was conducted to assess feasibility and efficacy of a combined breast health/weight loss intervention for 64 overweight or obese Black women, ages 35-65. The primary objectives were to determine whether a 20-week (twice weekly) intervention could decrease weight and dietary fat intake and increase physical activity and breast self-exam (BSE) proficiency. The project was implemented in two cohorts and retention was high for both (96% and 89%, respectively). Both cohorts showed increased proficiency in BSE in the intervention versus the control group (2.4 vs. -0.4, P<0.05; 3.3 vs. -0.2, P<0.001, respectively), but only cohort 2 showed decreased percent body weight (4.0% decrease vs. 0.9% increase, P<0.01), increased physical activity frequency (2.4 vs. 0.1 times/week, P<0.05), and a trend for decreased dietary fat (-2.6% kcal vs. 0.0% kcal, P=0.07) in the intervention compared to the control group. Few studies have documented weight loss among Black women, and no combined breast health/weight loss intervention has been conducted. This study documents the feasibility of recruiting, randomizing, and retaining women in a combined intervention and demonstrated weight loss and associated lifestyle changes.
    Preventive Medicine 04/2005; 40(4):373-83. DOI:10.1016/j.ypmed.2004.06.018 · 2.93 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "However, in the Malmo Preventive Project, when looking at fasting blood glucose and blood glucose levels after an oral glucose challenge no relationship was found with breast cancer in peri-and postmenopausal women (Manjer et al, 2001). Obesity, in particular central obesity, is one of the major risk factors for insulin resistance and hyperinsulinemia and is positively associated with breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women (Sellers et al, 1992; Hunter & Willett, 1993; Ballard-Barbash & Swanson, 1996; Trentham-Dietz et al, 1997; Galanis et al, 1998). Central obesity was directly associated with breast cancer independently of BMI in at least two studies (Folsom et al, 1990; Kaaks et al, 1998). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: AIM: The intent of this review is to critically analyze the scientific evidence on the role of the glycemic index in chronic Western disease and to discuss the utility of the glycemic index in the prevention and management of these disease states. BACKGROUND: The glycemic index ranks foods based on their postprandial blood glucose response. Hyperinsulinemia and insulin resistance, as well as their determinants (eg high energy intake, obesity, lack of physical activity) have been implicated in the etiology of diabetes, coronary heart disease and cancer. Recently, among dietary factors, carbohydrates have attracted much attention as a significant culprit, however, different types of carbohydrate produce varying glycemic and insulinemic responses. Low glycemic index foods, characterized by slowly absorbed carbohydrates, have been shown in some studies to produce beneficial effects on glucose control, hyperinsulinemia, insulin resistance, blood lipids and satiety. METHOD: Studies on the short and long-term metabolic effects of diets with different glycemic indices will be presented and discussed. The review will focus primarily on clinical and epidemiological data, and will briefly discuss in vitro and animal studies related to possible mechanisms by which the glycemic index may influence chronic disease.
    European Journal of Clinical Nutrition 12/2002; 56(11):1049-71. DOI:10.1038/sj.ejcn.1601454 · 2.95 Impact Factor
Show more