Literature DB >> 21346227

Reproductive history and oral contraceptive use in relation to risk of triple-negative breast cancer.

Amanda I Phipps1, Rowan T Chlebowski, Ross Prentice, Anne McTiernan, Jean Wactawski-Wende, Lewis H Kuller, Lucile L Adams-Campbell, Dorothy Lane, Marcia L Stefanick, Mara Vitolins, Geoffrey C Kabat, Thomas E Rohan, Christopher I Li.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Triple-negative (ie, estrogen receptor [ER], progesterone receptor, and HER2 negative) breast cancer occurs disproportionately among African American women compared with white women and is associated with a worse prognosis than ER-positive (ER+) breast cancer. Hormonally mediated risk factors may be differentially related to risk of triple-negative and ER+ breast cancers.
METHODS: Using data from 155,723 women enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative, we assessed associations between reproductive and menstrual history, breastfeeding, oral contraceptive use, and subtype-specific breast cancer risk. We used Cox regression to evaluate associations with triple-negative (N = 307) and ER+ (N = 2610) breast cancers and used partial likelihood methods to test for differences in subtype-specific hazard ratios (HRs).
RESULTS: Reproductive history was differentially associated with risk of triple-negative and ER+ breast cancers. Nulliparity was associated with decreased risk of triple-negative breast cancer (HR = 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.37 to 0.97) but increased risk of ER+ breast cancer (HR = 1.35, 95% CI = 1.20 to 1.52). Age-adjusted absolute rates of triple-negative breast cancer were 2.71 and 1.54 per 10,000 person-years in parous and nulliparous women, respectively; by comparison, rates of ER+ breast cancer were 21.10 and 28.16 per 10,000 person-years in the same two groups. Among parous women, the number of births was positively associated with risk of triple-negative disease (HR for three births or more vs one birth = 1.46, 95% CI = 0.82 to 2.63) and inversely associated with risk of ER+ disease (HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.74 to 1.04). Ages at menarche and menopause were modestly associated with risk of ER+ but not triple-negative breast cancer; breastfeeding and oral contraceptive use were not associated with either subtype.
CONCLUSION: The association between parity and breast cancer risk differs appreciably for ER+ and triple-negative breast cancers. These findings require further confirmation because the biological mechanisms underlying these differences are uncertain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21346227      PMCID: PMC3057984          DOI: 10.1093/jnci/djr030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  32 in total

1.  Clinicopathologic significance of the basal-like subtype of breast cancer: a comparison with hormone receptor and Her2/neu-overexpressing phenotypes.

Authors:  Mi-Jung Kim; Jae Y Ro; Sei-Hyun Ahn; Hak Hee Kim; Sung-Bae Kim; Gyungyub Gong
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2006-07-18       Impact factor: 3.466

2.  Differences in risk factors for breast cancer molecular subtypes in a population-based study.

Authors:  Xiaohong R Yang; Mark E Sherman; David L Rimm; Jolanta Lissowska; Louise A Brinton; Beata Peplonska; Stephen M Hewitt; William F Anderson; Neonila Szeszenia-Dabrowska; Alicja Bardin-Mikolajczak; Witold Zatonski; Richard Cartun; Daniza Mandich; Grzegorz Rymkiewicz; Marcin Ligaj; Stanislaw Lukaszek; Radzisaw Kordek; Montserrat García-Closas
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Descriptive analysis of estrogen receptor (ER)-negative, progesterone receptor (PR)-negative, and HER2-negative invasive breast cancer, the so-called triple-negative phenotype: a population-based study from the California cancer Registry.

Authors:  Katrina R Bauer; Monica Brown; Rosemary D Cress; Carol A Parise; Vincent Caggiano
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2007-05-01       Impact factor: 6.860

4.  The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes.

Authors:  Lisa A Carey; E Claire Dees; Lynda Sawyer; Lisa Gatti; Dominic T Moore; Frances Collichio; David W Ollila; Carolyn I Sartor; Mark L Graham; Charles M Perou
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2007-04-15       Impact factor: 12.531

5.  Advanced stages and poorly differentiated grade are associated with an increased risk of HER2/neu positive breast carcinoma only in White women: findings from a prospective cohort study of African-American and White-American women.

Authors:  Azadeh Stark; Alissa Kapke; Daniel Schultz; Ron Brown; Michael Linden; Usha Raju
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2007-04-13       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Epidemiology of basal-like breast cancer.

Authors:  Robert C Millikan; Beth Newman; Chiu-Kit Tse; Patricia G Moorman; Kathleen Conway; Lynn G Dressler; Lisa V Smith; Miriam H Labbok; Joseph Geradts; Jeannette T Bensen; Susan Jackson; Sarah Nyante; Chad Livasy; Lisa Carey; H Shelton Earp; Charles M Perou
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2007-06-20       Impact factor: 4.872

7.  How basal are triple-negative breast cancers?

Authors:  François Bertucci; Pascal Finetti; Nathalie Cervera; Benjamin Esterni; Fabienne Hermitte; Patrice Viens; Daniel Birnbaum
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2008-07-01       Impact factor: 7.396

8.  Reproductive factors and breast cancer risk according to joint estrogen and progesterone receptor status: a meta-analysis of epidemiological studies.

Authors:  Huiyan Ma; Leslie Bernstein; Malcolm C Pike; Giske Ursin
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 6.466

9.  Distinct molecular mechanisms underlying clinically relevant subtypes of breast cancer: gene expression analyses across three different platforms.

Authors:  Therese Sørlie; Yulei Wang; Chunlin Xiao; Hilde Johnsen; Bjørn Naume; Raymond R Samaha; Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2006-05-26       Impact factor: 3.969

10.  Gene expression profiling and histopathological characterization of triple-negative/basal-like breast carcinomas.

Authors:  Bas Kreike; Marieke van Kouwenhove; Hugo Horlings; Britta Weigelt; Hans Peterse; Harry Bartelink; Marc J van de Vijver
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  94 in total

1.  Characteristics of triple-negative breast cancer in patients with a BRCA1 mutation: results from a population-based study of young women.

Authors:  Eunjung Lee; Roberta McKean-Cowdin; Huiyan Ma; Darcy V Spicer; David Van Den Berg; Leslie Bernstein; Giske Ursin
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-10-17       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Breast cancer subtypes and previously established genetic risk factors: a bayesian approach.

Authors:  Katie M O'Brien; Stephen R Cole; Lawrence S Engel; Jeannette T Bensen; Charles Poole; Amy H Herring; Robert C Millikan
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2013-10-31       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Misconceptions surrounding pregnancy-associated breast cancer.

Authors:  Nada Khalil; Clare Fowler
Journal:  BMJ Case Rep       Date:  2018-12-17

Review 4.  Wounds that will not heal: pervasive cellular reprogramming in cancer.

Authors:  Jung S Byun; Kevin Gardner
Journal:  Am J Pathol       Date:  2013-02-22       Impact factor: 4.307

5.  Up-regulation and worse prognostic marker of cytoplasmic TARBP2 expression in obstinate breast cancer.

Authors:  Xiaoti Lin; Minqing Wu; Peng Liu; Fengqin Wei; Laisheng Li; Hailin Tang; Xinhua Xie; Xiaoping Liu; Lu Yang; Xiaoming Xie
Journal:  Med Oncol       Date:  2014-02-22       Impact factor: 3.064

6.  Alcohol Intake and Breast Cancer Risk in African American Women from the AMBER Consortium.

Authors:  Lindsay A Williams; Andrew F Olshan; Chi-Chen Hong; Elisa V Bandera; Lynn Rosenberg; Ting-Yuan David Cheng; Kathryn L Lunetta; Susan E McCann; Charles Poole; Laurence N Kolonel; Julie R Palmer; Christine B Ambrosone; Melissa A Troester
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 7.  Population and target considerations for triple-negative breast cancer clinical trials.

Authors:  Terry Hyslop; Yvonne Michael; Tiffany Avery; Hallgeir Rui
Journal:  Biomark Med       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 2.851

8.  Intrinsic subtypes from PAM50 gene expression assay in a population-based breast cancer cohort: differences by age, race, and tumor characteristics.

Authors:  Carol Sweeney; Philip S Bernard; Rachel E Factor; Marilyn L Kwan; Laurel A Habel; Charles P Quesenberry; Kaylynn Shakespear; Erin K Weltzien; Inge J Stijleman; Carole A Davis; Mark T W Ebbert; Adrienne Castillo; Lawrence H Kushi; Bette J Caan
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2014-02-12       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Discovery and preliminary confirmation of novel early detection biomarkers for triple-negative breast cancer using preclinical plasma samples from the Women's Health Initiative observational study.

Authors:  Christopher I Li; Justin E Mirus; Yuzheng Zhang; Arturo B Ramirez; Jon J Ladd; Ross L Prentice; Martin W McIntosh; Samir M Hanash; Paul D Lampe
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2012-08-19       Impact factor: 4.872

10.  Reproductive factors and risk of estrogen receptor positive, triple-negative, and HER2-neu overexpressing breast cancer among women 20-44 years of age.

Authors:  Christopher I Li; Elisabeth F Beaber; Mei-Tzu Chen Tang; Peggy L Porter; Janet R Daling; Kathleen E Malone
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2012-12-09       Impact factor: 4.872

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.