Family History, Reproductive, and Lifestyle Risk Factors for Fibroadenoma and Breast Cancer

Abstract Background To understand which breast cancer (BC) risk factors also increase the risk of fibroadenoma and investigate whether these factors have the same effect in BC patients with previous fibroadenoma. Methods Using multistate survival analysis on a large dataset (n = 58 322), we examined the effects of BC risk factors on transitions between three states: event-free, biopsy-confirmed fibroadenoma, and BC. Hazard ratios and corresponding 95% confidence intervals associated with covariate effects were estimated. Median follow-up time was 25.3 years. Results The mean ages at diagnosis of fibroadenoma and BC were 42.6 and 48.3 years, respectively. Participant characteristics known to increase the risk of BC were found to increase the risk of fibroadenoma (family history of BC and higher education). Participant characteristics known to confer protective effects for BC (older age at menarche, more children, and larger childhood body size) were found to reduce fibroadenoma risk. The effect sizes associated with the direct transitions from event-free to fibroadenoma and BC were generally not different for the covariates tested. Age at fibroadenoma diagnosis was associated with the transition from fibroadenoma to BC (hazard ratioper year increase = 1.07 [95% confidence interval = 1.03 to 1.12]). Conclusion We showed that biopsy-confirmed fibroadenomas shared many risk factors with BC. More work is needed to understand the relationships between fibroadenoma and BC to identify women who are at high risk of developing BC after a fibroadenoma diagnosis.

Download Full-text

Apolipoprotein E genotyping and questionnaire-based assessment of lifestyle risk factors in dyslipidemic patients with a family history of Alzheimer’s disease: test development for clinical application

Metabolic Brain Disease ◽

10.1007/s11011-015-9737-2 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 31 (1) ◽

pp. 213-224

Author(s):

H. K. Lückhoff ◽

M. Kidd ◽

S. J. van Rensburg ◽

D. P. van Velden ◽

M. J. Kotze

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Alzheimer’S Disease ◽

Alzheimer's Disease ◽

Family History ◽

Apolipoprotein E ◽

Clinical Application ◽

Test Development ◽

Lifestyle Risk Factors ◽

History Of ◽

Lifestyle Risk

Download Full-text

Re: Risk Factors for Breast Cancer According to Family History of Breast Cancer

JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute ◽

10.1093/jnci/88.14.1003 ◽

1996 ◽

Vol 88 (14) ◽

pp. 1003-1004 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

F. PARAZZINI ◽

C. L. VECCHIA ◽

L. CHATENOUD ◽

E. NEGRI ◽

S. FRANCESCHI

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Risk Factors ◽

Family History ◽

History Of

Download Full-text

A retrospective study on breast cancer presentation, risk factors, and protective factors in patients with a positive family history of breast cancer

The Breast Journal ◽

10.1111/tbj.13520 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 26 (3) ◽

pp. 469-473

Author(s):

Ying Yi Liaw ◽

Foong Shiang Loong ◽

Suzanne Tan ◽

Sze Yun On ◽

Evelyn Khaw ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Risk Factors ◽

Retrospective Study ◽

Family History ◽

Protective Factors ◽

Positive Family History ◽

History Of

Download Full-text

Predictors of mammographic density among women with a strong family history of breast cancer

BMC Cancer ◽

10.1186/s12885-019-5855-2 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 19 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Olivia Moran ◽

Andrea Eisen ◽

Rochelle Demsky ◽

Kristina Blackmore ◽

Julia A. Knight ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Risk Factors ◽

Body Weight ◽

Family History ◽

Mammographic Density ◽

Premenopausal Women ◽

Percent Density ◽

Strong Family History ◽

Dense Area ◽

History Of

Abstract Background Mammographic density is one of the strongest risk factors for breast cancer. In the general population, mammographic density can be modified by various exposures; whether this is true for women a strong family history is not known. Thus, we evaluated the association between reproductive, hormonal, and lifestyle risk factors and mammographic density among women with a strong family history of breast cancer but no BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. Methods We included 97 premenopausal and 59 postmenopausal women (age range: 27-68 years). Risk factor data was extracted from the research questionnaire closest in time to the mammogram performed nearest to enrollment. The Cumulus software was used to measure percent density, dense area, and non-dense area for each mammogram. Multivariate generalized linear models were used to evaluate the relationships between breast cancer risk factors and measures of mammographic density, adjusting for relevant covariates. Results Among premenopausal women, those who had two live births had a mean percent density of 28.8% vs. 41.6% among women who had one live birth (P=0.04). Women with a high body weight had a lower mean percent density compared to women with a low body weight among premenopausal (17.6% vs. 33.2%; P=0.0006) and postmenopausal women (8.7% vs. 14.7%; P=0.04). Among premenopausal women, those who smoked for 14 years or longer had a lower mean dense area compared to women who smoked for a shorter duration (25.3cm2 vs. 53.1cm2; P=0.002). Among postmenopausal women, former smokers had a higher mean percent density (19.5% vs. 10.8%; P=0.003) and dense area (26.9% vs. 16.4%; P=0.01) compared to never smokers. After applying the Bonferroni correction, the association between body weight and percent density among premenopausal women remained statistically significant. Conclusions In this cohort of women with a strong family history of breast cancer, body weight was associated with mammographic density. These findings suggest that mammographic density may explain the underlying relationship between some of these risk factors and breast cancer risk, and lend support for the inclusion of mammographic density into risk prediction models.

Download Full-text

Risk Factors of Breast Cancer in Relation to a Family History of Breast Cancer in Southern Sweden1

Familial Cancer ◽

10.1159/000412524 ◽

2015 ◽

pp. 34-35 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

H. Olsson ◽

M. Landin Olsson ◽

U. Kristoffersson ◽

J. Ranstam

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Risk Factors ◽

Family History ◽

History Of

Download Full-text

Hospital visitors as controls in case-control studies

Revista de Saúde Pública ◽

10.1590/s0034-89102001000500005 ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 35 (5) ◽

pp. 436-442 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Gulnar Azevedo S Mendonça ◽

José Eluf-Neto

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Risk Factors ◽

Family History ◽

Case Control ◽

Breast Size ◽

Case Control Studies ◽

Family History Of Cancer ◽

History Of ◽

Incident Cases ◽

History Of Cancer

OBJECTIVE: Selecting controls is one of the most difficult tasks in the design of case-control studies. Hospital controls may be inadequate and random controls drawn from the base population may be unavailable. The aim was to assess the use of hospital visitors as controls in a case-control study on the association of organochlorinated compounds and other risk factors for breast cancer conducted in the main hospital of the "Instituto Nacional de Câncer" -- INCA (National Cancer Institute) in Rio de Janeiro (Brazil). METHODS: The study included 177 incident cases and 377 controls recruited among female visitors. Three different models of control group composition were compared: Model 1, with all selected visitors; Model 2, excluding women visiting relatives with breast cancer; and Model 3, excluding all women visiting relatives with any type of cancer. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated to test the associations. RESULTS: Age-adjusted OR for breast cancer associated with risk factors other than family history of cancer, except smoking and breast size, were similar in the three models. Regarding family history of all cancers, except for breast cancer, there was a decreased risk in Models 1 and 2, while in Model 3 there was an increased risk, but not statistically significant. Family history of breast cancer was a risk factor in Models 2 and 3, but no association was found in Model 1. In multivariate analysis a significant risk of breast cancer was found when there was a family history of breast cancer in Models 2 and 3 but not in Model 1. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that while investigating risk factors unrelated to family history of cancer, the use of hospital visitors as controls may be a valid and feasible alternative.

Download Full-text

Prevalence of germline BRCA mutations in HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer: global results from the real-world, observational BREAKOUT study

Breast Cancer Research ◽

10.1186/s13058-020-01349-9 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 22 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Joyce O’Shaughnessy ◽

Christine Brezden-Masley ◽

Marina Cazzaniga ◽

Tapashi Dalvi ◽

Graham Walker ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Risk Factors ◽

Ovarian Cancer ◽

Risk Factor ◽

Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽

Family History ◽

Metastatic Breast ◽

Cytotoxic Chemotherapy ◽

First Line ◽

History Of

Abstract Background The global observational BREAKOUT study investigated germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAm) prevalence in a population of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Methods Eligible patients had initiated first-line cytotoxic chemotherapy for HER2-negative MBC within 90 days prior to enrollment. Hormone receptor (HR)-positive patients had experienced disease progression on or after prior endocrine therapy, or endocrine therapy was considered unsuitable. gBRCAm status was determined using baseline blood samples or prior germline test results. For patients with a negative gBRCAm test, archival tissue was tested for somatic BRCAm and homologous recombination repair mutations (HRRm). Details of first-line cytotoxic chemotherapy were also collected. Results Between March 2017 and April 2018, 384 patients from 14 countries were screened and consented to study enrollment; 341 patients were included in the full analysis set (median [range] age at enrollment: 56 [25–89] years; 256 (75.3%) postmenopausal). Overall, 33 patients (9.7%) had a gBRCAm (16 [4.7%] in gBRCA1 only, 12 [3.5%] in gBRCA2 only, and 5 [1.5%] in both gBRCA1 and gBRCA2). gBRCAm prevalence was similar in HR-positive and HR-negative patients. gBRCAm prevalence was 9.0% in European patients and 10.6% in Asian patients and was higher in patients aged ≤ 50 years at initial breast cancer (BC) diagnosis (12.9%) than patients aged > 50 years (5.4%). In patients with any risk factor for having a gBRCAm (family history of BC and/or ovarian cancer, aged ≤ 50 years at initial BC diagnosis, or triple-negative BC), prevalence was 10.4%, versus 5.8% in patients without these risk factors. HRRm prevalence was 14.1% (n = 9/64) in patients with germline BRCA wildtype. Conclusions Patient demographic and disease characteristics supported the association of a gBRCAm with younger age at initial BC diagnosis and family history of BC and/or ovarian cancer. gBRCAm prevalence in this cohort, not selected on the basis of risk factors for gBRCAm, was slightly higher than previous results suggested. gBRCAm prevalence among patients without a traditional risk factor for harboring a gBRCAm (5.8%) supports current guideline recommendations of routine gBRCAm testing in HER2-negative MBC, as these patients may benefit from poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor therapy. Trial registration NCT03078036.

Download Full-text