Reproductive History and Risk of Second Primary Breast Cancer: The WECARE Study

Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention (Impact Factor: 4.32). 06/2007; 16(5):906-11. DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-1003
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Women with an initial breast cancer diagnosis are at elevated risk of developing subsequent cancer in the contralateral breast. Studies of reproductive factors and contralateral breast cancer (CBC) have provided inconsistent results.
We employed a case-control study nested within five population-based cancer registries in the United States and Denmark to examine associations between reproductive history and CBC risk. Cases were women with asynchronous CBC who had their first primary invasive breast cancer before age 55 years. Two controls, who had only one primary breast cancer diagnosis, were individually matched to each case on age and year of diagnosis, race, and registry. A total of 694 case-control triplets and 11 case-control pairs were enrolled. Information regarding possible CBC risk factors was obtained via telephone interviews. Multivariable conditional logistic regression was used to estimate rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) associated with risk factors of interest.
Increasing number of full-term pregnancies (FTP) was inversely associated with CBC risk (P trend, 0.001). Women who reported menarche before age 13 years had an increased risk of CBC (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01-1.58). Age at first FTP, breastfeeding history, and age at menopause were not significantly associated with CBC risk.
These results suggest age at menarche and parity, which are established risk factors for first primary breast cancer, are associated with CBC, whereas other reproductive risk factors associated with first primary breast cancer, such as age at first FTP, are less important factors in the development of CBC.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The extent of the problem The number of cancer survivors has been increasing dramatically and is expected to keep growing in the near future. In the Netherlands, a 38% increase of cancer survivors is estimated from 2005 to 2015, representing an increase from 500,000 to 692,000 (ex-) patients in this period.1 It is well known that individuals who suffered from cancer exhibit a 20% higher risk of subsequent primary malignancies.2 Thus, as the number of cancer survivors increases, the number of patients with multiple primary cancers will increase as well. Because cancer is more frequent among the elderly, the ageing of the Dutch population will cause a further increase in the number of cases with multiple cancers: Only 5%-12% of cancer patients aged 50-64 were previously diagnosed with cancer, versus 12%-26% of those aged over 803. Other forces, including increased awareness of (second) malignancies, the higher use and sensitivity of diagnostic/detection methods, and the recent improvements in cancer treatment and survival will further lead to higher prevalence of multiple cancers. Cancer survivors who develop a second malignancy have a higher risk of dying4 and experience a worsening in their quality of life. Thus, increased interest in second cancer from the epidemiological and clinical perspective is highly relevant.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The number of female cancer survivors has been rising rapidly. We assessed the occurrence of breast cancer in these survivors over time. We computed incidence of primary breast cancer in two cohorts of female cancer survivors with a first diagnosis of cancer at ages 30+ in the periods 1975-1979 and 1990-1994. Cohorts were followed for 10 years through a population-based cancer registry. Over a period of 15 years, the incidence rate of breast cancer among female cancer survivors increased by 30% (age-standardised rate ratio (RR-adj): 1.30; 95% CI: 1.03-1.68). The increase was significant for non-breast cancer survivors (RR-adj: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.04-2.75). During the study period, the rate of second breast cancer stage II tripled (RR-adj: 3.10, 95% CI: 1.73-5.78). Non-breast cancer survivors had a significantly (P value=0.005) more unfavourable stage distribution (62% stage II and III) than breast cancer survivors (32% stage II and III). A marked rise in breast cancer incidence among female cancer survivors was observed. Research to optimise follow-up strategies for these women to detect breast cancer at an early stage is warranted.
    British Journal of Cancer 01/2009; 100(1):77-81. DOI:10.1038/sj.bjc.6604816 · 4.82 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Women with primary breast cancer are at increased risk of developing second primary breast cancer. Few studies have evaluated risk factors for the development of asynchronous contralateral breast cancer in women with breast cancer. In the Women's Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology Study (1985-2001), the roles of alcohol and smoking were examined in 708 women with asynchronous contralateral breast cancer (cases) compared with 1,399 women with unilateral breast cancer (controls). Cases and controls aged less than 55 years at first breast cancer diagnosis were identified from 5 population-based cancer registries in the United States and Denmark. Controls were matched to cases on birth year, diagnosis year, registry region, and race and countermatched on radiation treatment. Risk factor information was collected by telephone interview. Rate ratios and 95% confidence intervals were estimated by using conditional logistic regression. Ever regular drinking was associated with an increased risk of asynchronous contralateral breast cancer (rate ratio = 1.3, 95% confidence interval: 1.0, 1.6), and the risk increased with increasing duration (P = 0.03). Smoking was not related to asynchronous contralateral breast cancer. In this, the largest study of asynchronous contralateral breast cancer to date, alcohol is a risk factor for the disease, as it is for a first primary breast cancer.
    American journal of epidemiology 03/2009; 169(8):962-8. DOI:10.1093/aje/kwn422 · 4.98 Impact Factor