Yingchun Zhou1, Hongyang Zhao1, Cheng Peng2. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Union Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, P. R. China. 2. Department of Infectious Diseases, Union Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, P. R. China. Electronic address: drpengcheng@hust.edu.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Increasing studies focus on the health consequences of sedentary behavior, and whether sedentary behavior is associated with the risk of breast cancer remains uncertain. We applied quantitative techniques to synthesize relevant original observational studies to investigate this issue. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched through September 2014 to identify cohort and case-control studies that evaluated the association between sedentary behavior and breast cancer risk in women. Information on the characteristics of the included studies, risk estimates, and control for possible confounding factors, was extracted independently by two authors. A random effects model of meta-analysis was used to calculate the pooled risk estimate. RESULTS: Twenty one studies with 34 reports were included in our quantitative analysis. Sedentary behavior was found to slightly increase the risk of breast cancer in women and the pooled odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were 1.08 and 1.04 to 1.13, without substantial heterogeneity (P = .579, I(2) = 0.0%). Subgroup analysis showed that the risks of breast cancer for different domains of sedentary behavior were similar, although only occupational behavior showed statistical significance (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.18) and the combined ORs of breast cancer are of borderline significance for sedentary behavior of daily life (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.00-1.20) and sedentary behavior of leisure time (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.98-1.19). Exclusion of any single study did not materially alter the combined risk estimate. Visual inspection of funnel plot, Begg's and Egger's tests did not indicate evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated evidence from observational studies suggests a statistically significant slightly positive association of sedentary behavior with breast cancer risk.
PURPOSE: Increasing studies focus on the health consequences of sedentary behavior, and whether sedentary behavior is associated with the risk of breast cancer remains uncertain. We applied quantitative techniques to synthesize relevant original observational studies to investigate this issue. METHODS: PubMed and Embase were searched through September 2014 to identify cohort and case-control studies that evaluated the association between sedentary behavior and breast cancer risk in women. Information on the characteristics of the included studies, risk estimates, and control for possible confounding factors, was extracted independently by two authors. A random effects model of meta-analysis was used to calculate the pooled risk estimate. RESULTS: Twenty one studies with 34 reports were included in our quantitative analysis. Sedentary behavior was found to slightly increase the risk of breast cancer in women and the pooled odds ratio (OR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were 1.08 and 1.04 to 1.13, without substantial heterogeneity (P = .579, I(2) = 0.0%). Subgroup analysis showed that the risks of breast cancer for different domains of sedentary behavior were similar, although only occupational behavior showed statistical significance (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.18) and the combined ORs of breast cancer are of borderline significance for sedentary behavior of daily life (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 1.00-1.20) and sedentary behavior of leisure time (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.98-1.19). Exclusion of any single study did not materially alter the combined risk estimate. Visual inspection of funnel plot, Begg's and Egger's tests did not indicate evidence of publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Integrated evidence from observational studies suggests a statistically significant slightly positive association of sedentary behavior with breast cancer risk.
Authors: Sarah J O Nomura; Chiranjeev Dash; Lynn Rosenberg; Julie Palmer; Lucile L Adams-Campbell Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2016-09-08 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Sandahl H Nelson; Catherine R Marinac; Ruth E Patterson; Sarah J Nechuta; Shirley W Flatt; Bette J Caan; Marilyn L Kwan; Elizabeth M Poole; Wendy Y Chen; Xiao-ou Shu; John P Pierce Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2016-02-10 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Sarah J O Nomura; Chiranjeev Dash; Vanessa B Sheppard; Deborah Bowen; Matthew Allison; Wendy Barrington; Rowan Chlebowski; Mace Coday; Lifang Hou; Barbara Howard; Michael LaMonte; JoAnn E Manson; Marian L Neuhouser; Electra Paskett; Maryam Sattari; Marcia Stefanick; Jean Wactawski-Wende; Lucile L Adams-Campbell Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2017-10-03 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Carmen C Cuthbertson; Hazel B Nichols; Xianming Tan; Anna Kucharska-Newton; Gerardo Heiss; Corinne E Joshu; Elizabeth A Platz; Kelly R Evenson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2020-09-25 Impact factor: 4.254