Meizhen Sun1, Yongling Fan1, Yuanyuan Hou2, Yanyan Fan3. 1. a Department of Obstetrics , Yuhuangding Hospital , Yantai , China. 2. b Department of Health, Care Center , Yuhuangding Hospital , Yantai , China. 3. c Department of Nursing School , Binzhou Medical College , Yantai , China.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders, including preeclampsia (PE) and pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH), may influence the maternal risk of breast cancer. However, results of the cohort studies were inconsistent. METHODS: An updated meta-analysis of cohort studies was performed to evaluate the association between PE, PIH and maternal breast cancer incidence. Relevant studies were identified via searching of PubMed and Embase databases. A random effect model was applied to synthesize the results. Stratified analyses were performed to evaluate the potential influence of parity, gender of offspring, and study design on the association between PE and maternal breast cancer incidence. RESULTS: Ten cohort studies with 2,417,899 pregnant women were included. Maternal risk of breast cancer was not significantly affected by PE (risk ration [RR] = 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-1.06, p = .27), or PIH (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.81-1.12, p = .54). Interestingly, PE was associated with significantly lowered maternal incidence of breast cancer in women who give birth to male offspring (RR = 0.79, p < .01), and in those of prospective cohort studies (RR = 0.87, p < .01). However, no significant association between PE and maternal breast cancer was detected in primiparous women, those who gave birth to female offspring, or those of retrospective cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence did not support a conclusive association between PE, PIH and the maternal risk of breast cancer. Gender of the offspring may influence the association between PE and maternal breast cancer incidence.
BACKGROUND: Pregnancy-related hypertensive disorders, including preeclampsia (PE) and pregnancy-induced hypertension (PIH), may influence the maternal risk of breast cancer. However, results of the cohort studies were inconsistent. METHODS: An updated meta-analysis of cohort studies was performed to evaluate the association between PE, PIH and maternal breast cancer incidence. Relevant studies were identified via searching of PubMed and Embase databases. A random effect model was applied to synthesize the results. Stratified analyses were performed to evaluate the potential influence of parity, gender of offspring, and study design on the association between PE and maternal breast cancer incidence. RESULTS: Ten cohort studies with 2,417,899 pregnant women were included. Maternal risk of breast cancer was not significantly affected by PE (risk ration [RR] = 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.82-1.06, p = .27), or PIH (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.81-1.12, p = .54). Interestingly, PE was associated with significantly lowered maternal incidence of breast cancer in women who give birth to male offspring (RR = 0.79, p < .01), and in those of prospective cohort studies (RR = 0.87, p < .01). However, no significant association between PE and maternal breast cancer was detected in primiparous women, those who gave birth to female offspring, or those of retrospective cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence did not support a conclusive association between PE, PIH and the maternal risk of breast cancer. Gender of the offspring may influence the association between PE and maternal breast cancer incidence.
Entities:
Keywords:
Preeclampsia; breast cancer; cohort study; meta-analysis; pregnancy-induced hypertension
Authors: Diana K Haggerty; Kristen Upson; Diana C Pacyga; J Ebba Franko; Joseph M Braun; Rita S Strakovsky Journal: Reproduction Date: 2021-10-07 Impact factor: 3.923
Authors: Mandy Goldberg; Mary V Díaz-Santana; Katie M O'Brien; Shanshan Zhao; Clarice R Weinberg; Dale P Sandler Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2022-05-30 Impact factor: 4.860
Authors: Zahna Bigham; Yvonne Robles; Karen M Freund; Julie R Palmer; Kimberly A Bertrand Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2022-04-28 Impact factor: 4.624
Authors: Rebecca Troisi; Anne Gulbech Ording; Tom Grotmol; Ingrid Glimelius; Anders Engeland; Mika Gissler; Britton Trabert; Anders Ekbom; Laura Madanat-Harjuoja; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Steinar Tretli; Tone Bjørge Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Eliza C Miller; Ashley Wilczek; Natalie A Bello; Sarah Tom; Ronald Wapner; Yousin Suh Journal: Ageing Res Rev Date: 2021-12-03 Impact factor: 10.895
Authors: Zahra Pasdar; David T Gamble; Phyo K Myint; Robert N Luben; Nicholas J Wareham; Kay-Tee Khaw; Sohinee Bhattacharya Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-10-23 Impact factor: 6.639