Nur Zeinomar1, Sabine Oskar1, Rebecca D Kehm1, Shamin Sahebzeda1, Mary Beth Terry2. 1. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA; Herbert Irving Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: mt146@cumc.columbia.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The evidence evaluating environmental chemical exposures (ECE) and breast cancer (BC) risk is heterogeneous which may stem in part as few studies measure ECE during key BC windows of susceptibility (WOS). Another possibility may be that most BC studies are skewed towards individuals at average risk, which may limit the ability to detect signals from ECE. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the literature on ECE and BC focusing on three types of studies or subgroup analyses based on higher absolute BC risk: BC family history (Type 1); early onset BC (Type 2); and/or genetic susceptibility (Type 3). METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed database to identify epidemiologic studies examining ECE and BC risk published through June 1, 2019. RESULTS: We identified 100 publications in 56 unique epidemiologic studies. Of these 56 studies, only 2 (3.6%) were enriched with BC family history and only 11% of studies (6/56) were specifically enriched with early onset cases. 80% of the publications from these 8 enriched studies (Type 1: 8/10 publications; Type 2: 8/10 publications) supported a statistically significant association between ECE and BC risk including studies of PAH, indoor cooking, NO2, DDT; PCBs, PFOSA; metals; personal care products; and occupational exposure to industrial dyes. 74% of Type 3 publications (20/27) supported statistically significant associations for PAHs, traffic-related air pollution, PCBs, phthalates, and PFOSAs in subgroups of women with greater genetic susceptibility due to variants in carcinogen metabolism, DNA repair, oxidative stress, cellular apoptosis and tumor suppressor genes. DISCUSSION: Studies enriched for women at higher BC risk through family history, younger age of onset and/or genetic susceptibility consistently support an association between an ECE and BC risk. In addition to measuring exposures during WOS, designing studies that are enriched with women at higher absolute risk are necessary to robustly measure the role of ECE on BC risk.
BACKGROUND: The evidence evaluating environmental chemical exposures (ECE) and breast cancer (BC) risk is heterogeneous which may stem in part as few studies measure ECE during key BC windows of susceptibility (WOS). Another possibility may be that most BC studies are skewed towards individuals at average risk, which may limit the ability to detect signals from ECE. OBJECTIVES: We reviewed the literature on ECE and BC focusing on three types of studies or subgroup analyses based on higher absolute BC risk: BC family history (Type 1); early onset BC (Type 2); and/or genetic susceptibility (Type 3). METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed database to identify epidemiologic studies examining ECE and BC risk published through June 1, 2019. RESULTS: We identified 100 publications in 56 unique epidemiologic studies. Of these 56 studies, only 2 (3.6%) were enriched with BC family history and only 11% of studies (6/56) were specifically enriched with early onset cases. 80% of the publications from these 8 enriched studies (Type 1: 8/10 publications; Type 2: 8/10 publications) supported a statistically significant association between ECE and BC risk including studies of PAH, indoor cooking, NO2, DDT; PCBs, PFOSA; metals; personal care products; and occupational exposure to industrial dyes. 74% of Type 3 publications (20/27) supported statistically significant associations for PAHs, traffic-related air pollution, PCBs, phthalates, and PFOSAs in subgroups of women with greater genetic susceptibility due to variants in carcinogen metabolism, DNA repair, oxidative stress, cellular apoptosis and tumor suppressor genes. DISCUSSION: Studies enriched for women at higher BC risk through family history, younger age of onset and/or genetic susceptibility consistently support an association between an ECE and BC risk. In addition to measuring exposures during WOS, designing studies that are enriched with women at higher absolute risk are necessary to robustly measure the role of ECE on BC risk.
Authors: Amina Amadou; Delphine Praud; Thomas Coudon; Aurélie M N Danjou; Elodie Faure; Karen Leffondré; Muriel Le Romancer; Gianluca Severi; Pietro Salizzoni; Francesca Romana Mancini; Béatrice Fervers Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: K J Aronson; A B Miller; C G Woolcott; E E Sterns; D R McCready; L A Lickley; E B Fish; G Y Hiraki; C Holloway; T Ross; W M Hanna; S K SenGupta; J P Weber Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2000-01 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Katherine D Crew; Marilie D Gammon; Mary Beth Terry; Fang Fang Zhang; Meenakshi Agrawal; Sybil M Eng; Sharon K Sagiv; Susan L Teitelbaum; Alfred I Neugut; Regina M Santella Journal: Carcinogenesis Date: 2007-10-24 Impact factor: 4.944
Authors: Jaime E Hart; Kimberly A Bertrand; Natalie DuPre; Peter James; Verónica M Vieira; Rulla M Tamimi; Francine Laden Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2016-06-02 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Humberto Parada; Susan E Steck; Rebecca J Cleveland; Susan L Teitelbaum; Alfred I Neugut; Regina M Santella; Marilie D Gammon Journal: Ann Epidemiol Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 3.797
Authors: Jing Nie; Jan Beyea; Matthew R Bonner; Daikwon Han; John E Vena; Peter Rogerson; Dominica Vito; Paola Muti; Maurizio Trevisan; Stephen B Edge; Jo L Freudenheim Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2007-07-14 Impact factor: 2.506
Authors: Mary Beth Terry; Kelly-Anne Phillips; Mary B Daly; Esther M John; Irene L Andrulis; Saundra S Buys; David E Goldgar; Julia A Knight; Alice S Whittemore; Wendy K Chung; Carmel Apicella; John L Hopper Journal: Int J Epidemiol Date: 2015-07-13 Impact factor: 7.196
Authors: Alexandra J White; Susan L Teitelbaum; Steven D Stellman; Jan Beyea; Susan E Steck; Irina Mordukhovich; Kathleen M McCarty; Jiyoung Ahn; Pavel Rossner; Regina M Santella; Marilie D Gammon Journal: Environ Health Date: 2014-12-12 Impact factor: 5.984
Authors: Esther M John; Theresa H Keegan; Mary Beth Terry; Jocelyn Koo; Sue A Ingles; Jenny T Nguyen; Catherine Thomsen; Regina M Santella; Khue Nguyen; Beizhan Yan Journal: Epidemiology Date: 2022-07-27 Impact factor: 4.860
Authors: Jennifer E Kay; Bethsaida Cardona; Ruthann A Rudel; Laura N Vandenberg; Ana M Soto; Sofie Christiansen; Linda S Birnbaum; Suzanne E Fenton Journal: Curr Environ Health Rep Date: 2022-08-19
Authors: Nicole M Niehoff; Mary Beth Terry; Deborah B Bookwalter; Joel D Kaufman; Katie M O'Brien; Dale P Sandler; Alexandra J White Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2021-12-14 Impact factor: 4.090
Authors: Anna H Wu; Adrian A Franke; Lynne R Wilkens; Chiuchen Tseng; Shannon M Conroy; Yuqing Li; Meera Sangaramoorthy; Linda M Polfus; Mindy C DeRouen; Christian Caberto; Christopher Haiman; Daniel O Stram; Loïc Le Marchand; Iona Cheng Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 7.316
Authors: Rebecca D Kehm; E Jane Walter; Sabine Oskar; Melissa L White; Parisa Tehranifar; Julie B Herbstman; Frederica Perera; Lothar Lilge; Rachel L Miller; Mary Beth Terry Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2022-07-11 Impact factor: 8.408
Authors: Rebecca D Kehm; Adana A M Llanos; Jasmine A McDonald; Parisa Tehranifar; Mary Beth Terry Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-08-26 Impact factor: 6.575