Exposure to breastmilk in infancy and the risk of breast cancer

Freudenheim, Jo L.; Marshall, John R.; Graham, Saxon; Laughlin, Rosemary; Vena, J.E.; Bandera, Elisa V.; Muti, Paola; Swanson, Mark K.; Nemoto, Tetsuo

doi:10.1016/0378-5122(95)90002-0

Cited by 4 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the analysis relied on 205 premenopausal cases all of whom were of age 50 years or older; thus, statistical power was limited and the sample did not represent the age spectrum of most premenopausal cases. A recent meta-analysis [20] of studies published prior to 2006 [12–20] (including our earlier study [15]) reported a possible inverse association limited to premenopausal women. The present study, which enrolled a broad age range of participants (20–74 years) and large numbers of premenopausal cases (N=1,986), would have attenuated the summary estimate if included in the meta-analysis [20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Two case-control studies have shown a modest (26%) statistically significant reduced risk overall [12] or in young women (<45 years)[13]; however, both studies had low participation rates. A third case-control study found a small (14%) statistically non-significant reduced risk [14], and an early case-control study based on small numbers found no association [16].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Three studies evaluated risk of ever having been breastfed separately in premenopausal and postmenopausal women [12, 15, 19] and another was limited to premenopausal women only [18], but none found a statistically significant association among premenopausal women. One of the previous reports, based on an earlier phase of this study and an entirely different group of participants, suggested a 35% reduced risk among premenopausal women [15].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some [12–15] but not all [8, 16–18] case-control studies suggest a protective effect of being breastfed on breast cancer risk, although the results were statistically significant in only two studies [12, 13]. Two recent prospective studies showed no overall association [19, 20]; however, a recent meta-analysis suggests that being breastfed in infancy is associated with a significantly reduced risk of premenopausal breast cancer [20].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Exposure to breast milk in infancy and risk of breast cancer

Wise

Titus-Ernstoff

Newcomb

et al. 2009

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Early life exposures, such as being breastfed in infancy, may influence the risk of breast cancer in adulthood. We evaluated the risk of breast cancer in relation to ever having been breastfed in infancy among 9,442 women who participated in a population-based, case-control study. Cases were identified through cancer registries in three states (Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Wisconsin); controls were identified through statewide drivers’ license lists or Medicare lists. Data on known and suspected risk factors were obtained through telephone interview. We used unconditional logistic regression to assess the relation of breast cancer with ever having been breastfed and duration of breastfeeding (available for only 19% of breastfed women) in premenopausal women (1,986 cases and 1,760 controls) and postmenopausal women (2,600 cases and 2,493 controls). We found no evidence that ever having been breastfed in infancy was associated with breast cancer risk in either premenopausal women (odds ratio [OR]=0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.83–1.10) or postmenopausal women (OR=0.98; 95% CI=0.87–1.10). The association did not differ according to breast cancer stage, mother’s history of breast cancer, or any other reproductive factor assessed. Likewise, we found no association between breastfeeding duration and risk of breast cancer. Our results do not support the hypothesis that exposure to breast milk in infancy influences the risk of adult breast cancer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Exposure to breast milk in infancy and risk of breast cancer

Wise

Titus-Ernstoff

Newcomb

et al. 2009

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An infecting agent is likely to be transmitted by breast feeding, but (a) relative risk for mother-daughter incidence compared with controls in the large CASH Study was only 2.1 (95% CI 1.7, 2.6)36; (b) breast fed infants as compared with bottle fed were shown to have a decreased risk in some studies,37 38 while others showed no association39; and (c) no increased risk was found in daughters breast fed by mothers who later developed breast cancer 38. None of these findings are consistent with vertical transmission.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Breast cancer hypothesis: a single cause for the majority of cases

Wiseman

2000

Journal of Epidemiology &Amp; Community Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Study objective-The main cause of breast cancer remains unknown. Numerous causal factors or predisposing conditions have been proposed, but account for only a small percentage of the total disease. The current search for multiple causes is unavailing. This report explores whether any single aetiological agent may be responsible for the majority of cases, and attempts to define its properties. Methods-Examination of all relevant epidemiological and biological evidence. Main results-Genetic inheritance is not the main cause of breast cancer because most cases are sporadic, there is a low prevalence of family history, and genetically similar women have diVering rates after migration. Environmental exposure, such as pollution by industrialisation, is not a major cause, as deduced from a spectrum of epidemiological data. The possibility of infection as cause is not persuasive as there is no direct biological evidence and no epidemiological support. Oestrogen status is closely related to breast cancer risk, but there are numerous inconsistencies and paradoxes. It is suggested that oestrogens are not the proximate agent but are promoters acting in concert with the causal agent. Dietary factors, and especially fat, are associated with the aetiology of breast cancer as shown by intervention and ecological correlation studies, but the evidence from case-control and cohort studies is inconsistent and contradictory. Conclusions-The hypothesis that best fits the epidemiological data is that dietary fat is not itself the causal agent, but produces depletion of an essential factor that is normally protective against the development of breast cancer. Many of the observed inconsistencies in the epidemiology are explainable if deficiency of this agent is permissive for breast cancer to develop. Some properties of the putative agent are outlined, and research investigations proposed. (J Epidemiol Community Health 2000;54:851-858) The main cause of breast cancer remains unexplained by the known epidemiology.

show abstract

Pre- and perinatal factors and incidence of breast cancer in the Black Women’s Health Study

Barber

Bertrand

Rosenberg

et al. 2018

Cancer Causes Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To investigate the association between pre- or perinatal factors and breast cancer risk among African American women. Methods Participants in the Black Women’s Health Study, a prospective cohort of 59,000 African American women, reported birth weight, preterm birth, twin or triplet status, maternal age at birth, birth order, and having been breastfed during infancy at various times during follow-up from 1997 to 2015. Numbers of incident cases ranged from 312 for breastfed analyses to 1,583 for twin or triplet analyses. Using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression, we estimated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for associations between each factor and breast cancer risk overall and by estrogen receptor (ER) status. Results Compared to birth weights of 5 lbs. 8 oz.−8 lbs. 13 oz., low (<5 lbs. 8 oz.) and high (>8 lbs. 13 oz.) birth weights were associated with increased breast cancer risk; HRs (95% CI) were 1.19 (0.98–1.44) and 1.26 (0.97–1.63), respectively. Associations were similar by ER status. Having been born to a mother aged ≥35 years vs. <20 years was associated with risk of ER+ (HR=1.59, 95% CI 1.10–2.29), but not ER- breast cancer. Other perinatal factors were not associated with breast cancer. Conclusion African American women with a low or high birth weight or born to older mothers may have increased breast cancer risk. Trends towards delayed child birth and higher birth weights, coupled with disproportionately high rates of low birth weight among African Americans, may contribute to increases in breast cancer incidence.

show abstract

Exposure to breastmilk in infancy and the risk of breast cancer

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Exposure to breast milk in infancy and risk of breast cancer

Exposure to breast milk in infancy and risk of breast cancer

Breast cancer hypothesis: a single cause for the majority of cases

Pre- and perinatal factors and incidence of breast cancer in the Black Women’s Health Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About