Eboneé N Butler1, Chiu-Kit Tse2, Mary Elizabeth Bell3, Kathleen Conway2,3, Andrew F Olshan2,3, Melissa A Troester2,3. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill, CB 7435, 2101 McGavran-Greenberg Hall, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7435, USA. ebonee@unc.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill, CB 7435, 2101 McGavran-Greenberg Hall, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599-7435, USA. 3. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Growing evidence suggests an association between active cigarette smoking and increased breast cancer risk. However, the weak magnitude of association and conflicting results have yielded uncertainty and it is unknown whether associations differ by breast cancer subtype. METHODS: Using population-based case-control data from phases I and II of the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, we examined associations between self-reported measures of smoking and risk of Luminal and Basal-like breast cancers. We used logistic regression models to estimate case-control odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Ever smoking (current and former) was associated with a weakly increased risk of Luminal breast cancer (OR 1.12, 95 % CI 0.92-1.36) and was not associated with risk of Basal-like breast cancer (OR 0.96, 95 % CI 0.69-1.32). Similarly, smoking duration of more than 20 years was associated with increased risk of Luminal (OR 1.51, 95 % CI 1.19-1.93), but not Basal-like breast cancer (OR 0.90, 95 % CI 0.57-1.43). When stratified by race, elevated odds ratios between smoking and Luminal breast cancer risk were found among black women across multiple exposure measures (ever smoking, duration, and dose); conversely, among white women odds ratios were attenuated or null. CONCLUSIONS: Results from our study demonstrate a positive association between smoking and Luminal breast cancer risk, particularly among black women and women with long smoking histories. Addressing breast cancer heterogeneity in studies of smoking and breast cancer risk may elucidate associations masked in prior studies.
PURPOSE: Growing evidence suggests an association between active cigarette smoking and increased breast cancer risk. However, the weak magnitude of association and conflicting results have yielded uncertainty and it is unknown whether associations differ by breast cancer subtype. METHODS: Using population-based case-control data from phases I and II of the Carolina Breast Cancer Study, we examined associations between self-reported measures of smoking and risk of Luminal and Basal-like breast cancers. We used logistic regression models to estimate case-control odds ratios (OR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). RESULTS: Ever smoking (current and former) was associated with a weakly increased risk of Luminal breast cancer (OR 1.12, 95 % CI 0.92-1.36) and was not associated with risk of Basal-like breast cancer (OR 0.96, 95 % CI 0.69-1.32). Similarly, smoking duration of more than 20 years was associated with increased risk of Luminal (OR 1.51, 95 % CI 1.19-1.93), but not Basal-like breast cancer (OR 0.90, 95 % CI 0.57-1.43). When stratified by race, elevated odds ratios between smoking and Luminal breast cancer risk were found among black women across multiple exposure measures (ever smoking, duration, and dose); conversely, among white women odds ratios were attenuated or null. CONCLUSIONS: Results from our study demonstrate a positive association between smoking and Luminal breast cancer risk, particularly among black women and women with long smoking histories. Addressing breast cancer heterogeneity in studies of smoking and breast cancer risk may elucidate associations masked in prior studies.
Entities:
Keywords:
Basal-like; Breast cancer; Estrogen receptor; Luminal; Race; Smoking
Authors: William F Anderson; Philip S Rosenberg; Aleix Prat; Charles M Perou; Mark E Sherman Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-08-12 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Chad A Livasy; Charles M Perou; Gamze Karaca; David W Cowan; Diane Maia; Susan Jackson; Chiu-Kit Tse; Sarah Nyante; Robert C Millikan Journal: Hum Pathol Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 3.466
Authors: Takashi Nishioka; Hyun-Seok Kim; Ling-Yu Luo; Yi Huang; Jinjin Guo; Chang Yan Chen Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2011-11-15 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Michelle L Baglia; Linda S Cook; C Mei-Tzu; Charles Wiggins; Deirdre Hill; Peggy Porter; Christopher I Li Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2018-07-26 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Eboneé N Butler; Jeannette T Bensen; Mengjie Chen; Kathleen Conway; David B Richardson; Xuezheng Sun; Joseph Geradts; Andrew F Olshan; Melissa A Troester Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2017-11-13 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Kathleen Conway; Sharon N Edmiston; Eloise Parrish; Christopher Bryant; Chiu-Kit Tse; Theresa Swift-Scanlan; Lauren E McCullough; Pei Fen Kuan Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2017-03-08 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Humberto Parada; Xuezheng Sun; Chiu-Kit Tse; Andrew F Olshan; Melissa A Troester; Kathleen Conway Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2017-07-10 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Ugonna Ihenacho; Ann S Hamilton; Wendy J Mack; Anna H Wu; Jennifer B Unger; Dorothy R Pathak; Kelly A Hirko; Richard T Houang; Michael F Press; Kendra L Schwartz; Lydia R Marcus; Ellen M Velie Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2022-08-04 Impact factor: 4.624
Authors: Marc A Emerson; Katherine E Reeder-Hayes; Heather J Tipaldos; Mary E Bell; Marina R Sweeney; Lisa A Carey; H Shelton Earp; Andrew F Olshan; Melissa A Troester Journal: Curr Breast Cancer Rep Date: 2020-05-14