Katie M O'Brien1, Alexander P Keil1,2, Quaker E Harmon1, Chandra L Jackson1,3, Alexandra J White1, Mary V Díaz-Santana4, Jack A Taylor1, Dale P Sandler1. 1. From the Epidemiology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC. 2. Department of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC. 3. Intramural Program, National Institute of Minority Health and Health Disparities, Bethesda, MD. 4. Biostatistics and Computational Biology Branch, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vitamin D has anticarcinogenic properties, but a relationship between vitamin D supplement use and breast cancer is not established. Few studies have accounted for changes in supplement use over time or evaluated racial-ethnic differences. METHODS: The Sister Study is a prospective cohort of 50,884 women with 35-74 years of age who had a sister with breast cancer, but no breast cancer themselves at enrollment (2003-2009). We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between vitamin D supplement use and incident breast cancer (3,502 cases; median follow-up 10.5 years). RESULTS: Vitamin D supplement use was common, with 64% reporting ever use (at least once per month) in the year before enrollment. Considering supplement use over time, ever use of vitamin D supplements was not meaningfully associated with breast cancer (HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.88, 1.0), relative to never use. However, after adjusting for prior use, recent use of vitamin D supplements ≥1/month was inversely associated with breast cancer (HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.78, 1.0), relative to nonrecent use. The inverse association was stronger for ductal carcinoma in situ (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.52, 0.87) than invasive breast cancer (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.72, 1.1, p-for-heterogeneity = 0.02). Supplement use was less common among African American/Black (56%) and non-Black Hispanic/Latina (50%) women than non-Hispanic White women (66%), but there was limited evidence of racial-ethnic differences in HRs (p-for-heterogeneity = 0.16 for ever use, P = 0.55 for recent). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that recent vitamin D use is inversely associated with breast cancer risk.
BACKGROUND: Vitamin D has anticarcinogenic properties, but a relationship between vitamin D supplement use and breast cancer is not established. Few studies have accounted for changes in supplement use over time or evaluated racial-ethnic differences. METHODS: The Sister Study is a prospective cohort of 50,884 women with 35-74 years of age who had a sister with breast cancer, but no breast cancer themselves at enrollment (2003-2009). We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between vitamin D supplement use and incident breast cancer (3,502 cases; median follow-up 10.5 years). RESULTS: Vitamin D supplement use was common, with 64% reporting ever use (at least once per month) in the year before enrollment. Considering supplement use over time, ever use of vitamin D supplements was not meaningfully associated with breast cancer (HR = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.88, 1.0), relative to never use. However, after adjusting for prior use, recent use of vitamin D supplements ≥1/month was inversely associated with breast cancer (HR = 0.88, 95% CI = 0.78, 1.0), relative to nonrecent use. The inverse association was stronger for ductal carcinoma in situ (HR = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.52, 0.87) than invasive breast cancer (HR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.72, 1.1, p-for-heterogeneity = 0.02). Supplement use was less common among African American/Black (56%) and non-Black Hispanic/Latina (50%) women than non-Hispanic White women (66%), but there was limited evidence of racial-ethnic differences in HRs (p-for-heterogeneity = 0.16 for ever use, P = 0.55 for recent). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with the hypothesis that recent vitamin D use is inversely associated with breast cancer risk.
Authors: Sara Gandini; Mathieu Boniol; Jari Haukka; Graham Byrnes; Brian Cox; Mary Jane Sneyd; Patrick Mullie; Philippe Autier Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2011-03-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Marjorie L McCullough; Emilie S Zoltick; Stephanie J Weinstein; Veronika Fedirko; Molin Wang; Nancy R Cook; A Heather Eliassen; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Claudia Agnoli; Demetrius Albanes; Matthew J Barnett; Julie E Buring; Peter T Campbell; Tess V Clendenen; Neal D Freedman; Susan M Gapstur; Edward L Giovannucci; Gary G Goodman; Christopher A Haiman; Gloria Y F Ho; Ronald L Horst; Tao Hou; Wen-Yi Huang; Mazda Jenab; Michael E Jones; Corinne E Joshu; Vittorio Krogh; I-Min Lee; Jung Eun Lee; Satu Männistö; Loic Le Marchand; Alison M Mondul; Marian L Neuhouser; Elizabeth A Platz; Mark P Purdue; Elio Riboli; Trude Eid Robsahm; Thomas E Rohan; Shizuka Sasazuki; Minouk J Schoemaker; Sabina Sieri; Meir J Stampfer; Anthony J Swerdlow; Cynthia A Thomson; Steinar Tretli; Schoichiro Tsugane; Giske Ursin; Kala Visvanathan; Kami K White; Kana Wu; Shiaw-Shyuan Yaun; Xuehong Zhang; Walter C Willett; Mitchel H Gail; Regina G Ziegler; Stephanie A Smith-Warner Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Katie M O'Brien; Dale P Sandler; Melissa House; Jack A Taylor; Clarice R Weinberg Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Lars Rejnmark; Anna Tietze; Peter Vestergaard; Line Buhl; Melsene Lehbrink; Lene Heickendorff; Leif Mosekilde Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2009-09-29 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Ben Schöttker; Rolf Jorde; Anne Peasey; Barbara Thorand; Eugène H J M Jansen; Lisette de Groot; Martinette Streppel; Julian Gardiner; José Manuèl Ordóñez-Mena; Laura Perna; Tom Wilsgaard; Wolfgang Rathmann; Edith Feskens; Ellen Kampman; Galatios Siganos; Inger Njølstad; Ellisiv Bøgeberg Mathiesen; Růžena Kubínová; Andrzej Pająk; Roman Topor-Madry; Abdonas Tamosiunas; Maria Hughes; Frank Kee; Martin Bobak; Antonia Trichopoulou; Paolo Boffetta; Hermann Brenner Journal: BMJ Date: 2014-06-17
Authors: Aimee A D'Aloisio; Hazel B Nichols; M Elizabeth Hodgson; Sandra L Deming-Halverson; Dale P Sandler Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2017-10-23 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Katie M O'Brien; Quaker E Harmon; Chandra L Jackson; Mary V Diaz-Santana; Jack A Taylor; Clarice R Weinberg; Dale P Sandler Journal: Cancer Date: 2022-04-25 Impact factor: 6.921