| Literature DB >> 31208017 |
Lídia Cedó1,2, Srinivasa T Reddy3, Eugènia Mato4,5, Francisco Blanco-Vaca6,7,8, Joan Carles Escolà-Gil9,10,11.
Abstract
Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer and primary cause of cancer-related mortality in women. The identification of risk factors can improve prevention of cancer, and obesity and hypercholesterolemia represent potentially modifiable breast cancer risk factors. In the present work, we review the progress to date in research on the potential role of the main cholesterol transporters, low-density and high-density lipoproteins (LDL and HDL), on breast cancer development. Although some studies have failed to find associations between lipoproteins and breast cancer, some large clinical studies have demonstrated a direct association between LDL cholesterol levels and breast cancer risk and an inverse association between HDL cholesterol and breast cancer risk. Research in breast cancer cells and experimental mouse models of breast cancer have demonstrated an important role for cholesterol and its transporters in breast cancer development. Instead of cholesterol, the cholesterol metabolite 27-hydroxycholesterol induces the proliferation of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer cells and facilitates metastasis. Oxidative modification of the lipoproteins and HDL glycation activate different inflammation-related pathways, thereby enhancing cell proliferation and migration and inhibiting apoptosis. Cholesterol-lowering drugs and apolipoprotein A-I mimetics have emerged as potential therapeutic agents to prevent the deleterious effects of high cholesterol in breast cancer.Entities:
Keywords: 27-hydroxycholesterol; Breast cancer; HDL; LDL; cholesterol; cholesterol-lowering therapies
Year: 2019 PMID: 31208017 PMCID: PMC6616617 DOI: 10.3390/jcm8060853
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Med ISSN: 2077-0383 Impact factor: 4.241
Clinical and epidemiological studies linking low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) levels to breast cancer risk.
| Reference | Year | Study Design | Participants | Main Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nowak et al. [ | 2018 | Mendelian randomization | >400,000 | Raised LDL-C increased the risk of breast cancer (OR = 1.09 (1.02–1.18)) and ER-positive breast cancer (OR = 1.14 (1.05–1.24)). |
| Ni et al. [ | 2015 | Meta-analysis | 1,189,635 | Inverse association between HDL-C and breast cancer risk among postmenopausal women (RR = 0.45 (0.64–0.93)). No association in premenopausal women. |
| Touvier et al. [ | 2015 | Meta-analysis | 1,489,484 | Inverse association between HDL-C and breast cancer risk among premenopausal women (HR = 0.77 (0.31–0.67)). No association in postmenopausal women. |
| Borgquist et al. [ | 2016 | Prospective | 5281 | No evident associations between LDL-C or HDL-C and breast cancer incidence. |
| Chandler et al. [ | 2016 | Prospective | 15,602 | No association between LDL-C or HDL-C and breast cancer risk. |
| His et al. [ | 2014 | Prospective | 7557 | HDL-C was inversely associated with breast cancer risk (HR 1 mmol L−1 increment = 0.48 (0.28–0.83)). |
| Rodrigues dos Santos et al. [ | 2014 | Prospective | 244 | Systemic levels of LDL-C correlated positively with tumor size (Spearman’s r = 0.199, |
| Kucharska-Newton et al. [ | 2008 | Prospective | 7575 | Modest association of low HDL-C (<50 mg dL−1) with breast cancer among premenopausal women (HR = 1.67 (1.06–2.63)). No association in postmenopausal women. |
| Furberg et al. [ | 2004 | Prospective | 30,546 | The risk of postmenopausal breast cancer was reduced in women in the highest quartile of HDL-C (>1.64 mmol L−1) compared with women in the lowest quartile (<1.20 mmol L−1; RR = 0.73 (0.55–0.95)). No association was found in premenopausal women. |
| Li et al. [ | 2017 | Retrospective | 1044 | Decreased HDL-C levels showed significant association with worse overall survival (HR = 0.528 (0.302–0.923)). |
| Li et al. [ | 2018 | Case–control | Total: 3537 | The levels of LDL-C and HDL-C were lower in breast cancer patients than controls ( |
| His et al. [ | 2017 | Case–control | Total: 1626 | No association between LDL-C or HDL-C and breast cancer risk or survival. |
| Martin et al. [ | 2015 | Case–control | Total: 837 | HDL-C was positively associated (75th vs. 25th percentile: 23% higher, |
| Llanos et al. [ | 2012 | Case–control | Total: 199 | Increasing levels of LDL-C were inversely associated with breast cancer risk (OR = 0.41 (0.21–0.81)). |
| Yadav et al. [ | 2012 | Case–control | Total: 139 | Postmenopausal breast cancer patients had higher LDL-C levels ( |
| Kim et al. [ | 2009 | Case–control | Total: 2070 | Protective effect of HDL-C on breast cancer was only observed among premenopausal women (OR = 0.49 (0.33–0.72) for HDL-C ≥ 60 vs. <50 mg dL−1 ( |
| Owiredu et al. [ | 2009 | Case–control | Total: 200 | Increased LDL-C levels in postmenopausal breast cancer patients vs. controls ( |
| Michalaki et al. [ | 2005 | Case–control | Total: 100 | A decrease in HDL-cholesterol was observed in patients with breast cancer vs. controls ( |
LDL-C = low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, HDL-C = high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, ER = estrogen receptor, OR = odds ratio, RR = risk ratio, and HR = hazard ratio. Between brackets, 95% confidence interval.
Figure 1Effects of human apolipoprotein A-II (hApoA-II) overexpression on tumor development in polyoma middle T (PyMT) mice. PyMT mice were backcrossed with hApoA-II transgenic (TG) mice on a C57BL/6 background. The mice were maintained on a regular chow diet until 19 weeks of age, when they were euthanized, and the mammary glands were excised and weighed. Serum lipids were determined after an overnight fasting period and 3 h after a 0.15 mL dose of olive oil by oral gavage. A) Mammary gland weight. B) Serum lipid levels in fasting and postprandial conditions (TG = triglycerides, and HDL-C = high-density lipoprotein cholesterol). Values shown represent the mean ± SEM. A t-test was performed to determine the statistical significance between groups. * p < 0.05 vs. PyMT mice.
Clinical and epidemiological studies linking statin treatment to breast cancer risk.
| Reference | Year | Study Design | Participants | Main Findings |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ference et al. [ | 2019 | Mendelian randomization | 654,783 | Genetic inhibition of |
| Islam et al. [ | 2017 | Meta-analysis | 121,399 | There was no association between statin use and breast cancer risk. |
| Liu et al. [ | 2017 | Meta-analysis | 197,048 | Significant protective effects of lipophilic statin use, but not hydrophilic statins, against cancer-specific mortality (HR = 0.57 (0.46–0.70)). |
| Mansourian et al. [ | 2016 | Meta-analysis | 124,669 | Significant reduction in breast cancer recurrence (OR = 0.792 (0.735–0.853)) and death (OR = 0.849 (0.827–0.870)) among statin users. |
| Manthravadi et al. [ | 2016 | Meta-analysis | 75,684 | Lipophilic statin use was associated with improved recurrence-free survival (HR = 0.72 (0.59–0.89)). |
| Wu et al. [ | 2015 | Meta-analysis | 144,830 | There was a significantly negative association between prediagnosis statin use and breast cancer mortality (for overall survival: HR = 0.68 (0.54–0.84), and for disease-specific survival (HR = 0.72 (0.53–0.99)). There was also a significant inverse association between postdiagnosis statin use and breast cancer disease-specific survival (HR = 0.65 (0.43–0.98)). No significant association was detected between statin use and breast cancer risk. |
| Undela et al. [ | 2012 | Meta-analysis | >2.4 million | Statin use and long-term statin use did not significantly affect breast cancer risk. |
| Bonovas et al. [ | 2005 | Meta-analysis | 327,238 | Statin use did not significantly affect breast cancer risk. |
| Dale et al. [ | 2005 | Meta-analysis | 86,936 | Statins did not reduce the incidence of breast cancer. |
| Borgquist et al. [ | 2017 | Prospective | 8010 | Initiation of cholesterol-lowering medication in postmenopausal women with early stage, hormone receptor-positive invasive breast cancer during endocrine therapy was related to improved disease-free survival (HR = 0.79 (0.66–0.95)), breast cancer-free interval (HR = 0.76 (0.60–0.97)), and distant recurrence-free interval (HR = 0.74 (0.56–0.97)). |
| Murtola et al. [ | 2014 | Prospective | 31,236 | Both postdiagnostic and prediagnostic statin uses were associatedwith a lowered risk of breast cancer death (HR = 0.46 (0.38–0.55) and HR = 0.54 (0.44–0.67), respectively). |
| Brewer et al. [ | 2013 | Prospective | 723 | Hydrophilic statins were associated with significantly improved progression-free survival compared with no statin (HR = 0.49 (0.28–0.84)) in inflammatory breast cancer patients. |
| Ahern et al. [ | 2011 | Prospective | 18,769 | Significant reduction in breast cancer recurrence among patients using simvastatin after 10 y of follow up (adjusted HR = 0.70 (0.57–0.86)). |
| Cauley et al. [ | 2003 | Prospective | 7528 | Older women who used statins had a reduced risk of breast cancer (RR = 0.28 (0.09–0.86), adjusted for age and body weight) compared with nonusers. |
| Shaitelman et al. [ | 2017 | Retrospective | 869 | Statin use was significantly associated with overall survival (HR = 0.10 (0.01–0.76)) in triple-negative breast cancer. |
| Smith et al. [ | 2017 | Retrospective | 6314 | Prediagnostic statin use was associated with breast cancer-specific mortality (HR = 0.81 (0.68–0.96)). This reduction was greatest in statin users with ER-positive tumors (HR = 0.69 (0.55–0.85)). |
| Anothaisintawee et al. [ | 2016 | Retrospective | 15,718 | Using lipophilic statins, but not hydrophilic statins, could significantly reduce the risk of breast cancer (risk difference = –0.0034 |
| Mc Menamin et al. [ | 2016 | Retrospective | 15,140 | There was no evidence of an association between statin use and breast cancer-specific death. |
| Sakellaki et al. [ | 2016 | Retrospective | 610 | Statins may be linked to a favorable outcome in early breast cancer patients, |
| Chae et al. [ | 2011 | Retrospective | 703 | Significant reduction in breast cancer recurrence among patients who used statins (HR = 0.43 (0.26–0.70)). No association was found regarding overall survival. |
| Schairer et al. [ | 2018 | Case–control | Total: 228,973 Cases: 30,004 | Statin use did not significantly affect breast cancer risk. |
| McDougall et al. [ | 2013 | Case–control | Total: 2886 | Current users of statins for ≥10 y had increased risk of IDC (OR = 1.83 (1.14–2.93)) and ILC (OR = 1.97 (1.25–3.12)) compared with never users of statins. |
OR = odds ratio, RR = risk ratio, HR = hazard ratio, y = years, IDC = invasive ductal carcinoma; and ILC = invasive lobular carcinoma. Between brackets, 95% confidence interval.
Figure 2Mechanisms by which low-density lipoprotein (LDL), high-density lipoprotein (HDL), and their modified forms induce proliferation and migration and reduce apoptosis in breast cancer cells. OLR1 = OxLDL lecithin-like receptor 1, LDLR = LDL receptor, SR-BI = scavenger receptor class B type I, HMGCR = hydroxy-methyl-glutaryl-coenzyme A reductase, ACAT1 = acyl-CoA:cholesterol acyltransferase 1, 27-HC = 27-hydroxycholesterol, ERK1/2 = extracellular signal-regulated kinases ½, NFκB = nuclear factor κB, and ER/LXR = estrogen receptor/liver X receptor.