Article

Estimating age-specific breast cancer risks: a descriptive tool to identify age interactions.

Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Health, Executive Plaza South 8070, 6120 Executive Plaza Blvd, Rockville, MD 20892-7242, USA.
Cancer Causes and Control (Impact Factor: 2.96). 06/2007; 18(4):439-47. DOI: 10.1007/s10552-006-0092-9
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Clarifying age-specific female breast cancer risks and interactions may provide important etiologic clues.
Using a population-based case-control study in Poland (2000-2003) of 2,386 incident breast cancer cases and 2,502 control subjects aged 25-74 years, we estimated age-specific breast cancer incidence rates according to risk factors.
Breast cancer risks were elevated among women with positive family history (FH), younger age at menarche, older age at first full-term birth, nulliparity, exogenous hormonal usage, and reduced physical activity (PA). Notwithstanding overall risks, we observed statistically significant quantitative (non-crossover) and qualitative (crossover) age interactions for all risk factors except for FH and PA. For example, nulliparity compared to parity reduced breast cancer risk among women ages 25-39 years then rates crossed or reversed, after which nulliparity increased relative risks among women ages 40-74 years.
Though quantitative age interactions could be expected, qualitative interactions were somewhat counterintuitive. If confirmed in other populations, qualitative interactions for a continuous covariate such as age will be difficult to reconcile in a sequential (multistep or monolithic) 'stochastic' breast cancer model. Alternatively, the reversal of relative risks among younger and older women suggests subgroup heterogeneity with different etiologic mechanisms for early-onset and late-onset breast cancer types.

1 Follower
 · 
129 Views
  • Source
    • "A lot of studies about the association with etiology and risk factors of breast cancer were conducted, particularly physiological and reproductive factors. Various physiological and reproductive factors, including age at menarche, age at menopause, age at first pregnancy and parity have been shown to modify the risk of breast cancer (Oran et al, 2004; Anderson et al, 2007; Iwasaki et al, 2007). Our results in this study also demonstrated that early age at menarche (≤13 years old), later age at menopause (>50 years old) and later age at first pregnancy were associated with an increased risk for breast cancer, and childbirth was associated with a decreased risk for breast cancer. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the relationship between physiological, reproductive factors and risk of breast cancer, we conducted a case-control study with 669 cases and 682 population-based controls in Jiangsu Province of China. A structured questionnaire was used to elicit detailed information. All subjects completed an in-person interview. Unconditional logistic regression analysis was performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) as measures of risk for breast cancer. The results have revealed that there was an increasing risk of breast cancer, include early age at menarche(≤ 13 year), late age at menopause(< 50 year) and older age at first pregnancy (≤ 30 year). Breastfeeding was associated significantly with a reduced risk of breast cancer. Women who had history of breastfeeding were at significantly decreased OR (0.44, 95%CI: 0.27-0.73). The protective effects of breastfeeding for breast cancer seemed greater for women who had extended duration of breastfeeding during their lifetime (p for linear trend: 0.0095). These results suggested that physiological and reproductive factors may play important roles in the development of breast cancer among Jiangsu' women of China.
    Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention: APJCP 01/2011; 12(3):787-90. · 2.51 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Tese (doutorado)—Universidade de Brasília, Faculdade de Ciências da Saúde, 2007. OBJETIVO: Criar um modelo preditivo para o risco de malignidade em nódulos sólidos da mama, com expressão ecográfica. METODOLOGIA: Este estudo multicêntrico, desenvolvido por médicos da Universidade Federal de Goiás e da Santa Casa de Misericórdia de Belo Horizonte, incluiu prospectivamente 1.403 nódulos sólidos da mama. As características da paciente e do exame ultrasonográfico foram incluídas em um formulário próprio. Cada característica ultrasonográfica foi analisada e comparada com o resultado do diagnóstico definitivo, ou seja, com o resultado anatomopatológico ou o resultado do seguimento de 2 anos, sem alteração do tamanho da lesão. A idade das mulheres e o histórico familiar de câncer de mama foram também analisados. RESULTADOS: Das 1.403 lesões incluídas no estudo, 1.390 (99,1%) tiveram um diagnóstico conclusivo. Dentre elas, haviam 343 (24,7%) tumores malignos e 1.047 (75,3%) nódulos benignos. As odds ratios (e intervalos de confiança) de malignidade de cada característica incluída do modelo preditivo, na análise multivariada, foram: forma irregular / margens não circunscritas, 16,02 (7,75-33,09); ecotextura heterogênea, 4,50 (2,42-8,23); orientação vertical (não paralela à pele), 2,23 (1,04-4,75); halo ecogênico anterior, 2,62 (1,09-6,31); sombra posterior, 2,38 (1,23-4,62); idade maior que 40 anos, 2,19 (1.26-3.81); histórico familiar de 1° grau positivo (mãe, irmã, filha), 7,50 (2,65-21,18). Não houve vantagem em incluir a presença de vasos internos e a presença de ligamentos de Cooper espessados no modelo. O modelo foi chamado de SONOBREAST e apresenta-se disponível para uso médico, gratuitamente, no site: http://www.sonobreast.com. CONCLUSÃO: A probabilidade de malignidade para tumores mamários pode ser estimada com base em suas características ultra-sonográficas, na idade das mulheres e no histórico familiar para o câncer de mama. ______________________________________________________________________________________ ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To create a predictive model for the risk of malignancy in solid breast nodules, with echografic expression. METHODS: This multicentric study, performed by physicians from the Federal University of Goiás and from the Santa Casa de Misericórdia of Belo Horizonte, included prospectively 1,403 patients who presented with solid breast nodules. The ultrasound images of the breast and the features were recorded in a formulary. Each ultrasound feature was analyzed and compared with the definitive diagnosis, i.e. the anatomopathological findings, after the lesion was excised, or a minimum follow-up of 2 years. The age of the women and the familial history of breast cancer were also included in the model. RESULTS: From the 1,403 lesions included in the study, 1,390 (99.1%) had a conclusive diagnosis. Among them, there were 343 (24.7%) malign tumors, and 1,047 (75.3%) benign nodules. The odds ratio (and confidence interval) of breast malignancy for each variable included in the model, as calculated by multivariate analysis, were as follows: irregular shape / not circumscribed margins, 16.02 (7.75- 33.09); heterogeneous echo texture, 4.50 (2.42-8.23); vertical orientation (non parallel to the skin), 2.23 (1.04-4.75); anterior echogenic rim, 2.62 (1.09-6,31); posterior shadowing, 2.38 (1.23-4.62); age more than 40 years, 2,19 (1,26-3,81); first-degree positive family history (mother, sister, daughter), 7,50 (2,65-21,18). There were no advantage to include the presence of internal vascularity and the presence of thickened Cooper’s ligaments in the model. The predictive model was named SONOBREAST and it is freely available for medical purposes in the internet site: http://www.sonobreast.com. CONCLUSION: The probability of malignancy in breast tumors can be stipulated based on their ultrasound features, the age of the woman and the family history of breast cancer.
    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia 01/2007; DOI:10.1590/S0100-72032007001200010
  • Source