Hormone replacement therapy and breast carcinoma risk in Hispanic and non‐Hispanic women

Li, Rui; Gilliland, Frank D.; Baumgartner, Kathy B.; Samet, Jonathan M.

doi:10.1002/cncr.10791

Cited by 28 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This is in agreement with evidence from some studies, [2][3][4]11,14,[33][34][35] but not with others that found a moderate increase in breast cancer risk with ET preparations. 5,10,13,21,[36][37][38][39] We found a moderate elevated risk in users of oral and transdermal estradiol, which is in agreement with results from Lyytinen et al 40 in Finland that found a similar increased risk of breast cancer for oral and transdermal users of estradiol. Use of vaginal estradiol is relatively common compared with oral and transdermal use.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Postmenopausal hormone therapy and the risk of breast cancer in Norway

Román

Sakshaug

Graff-Iversen

et al. 2015

Intl Journal of Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is convincing evidence that combined estrogen-progestin therapy (EPT) increases the risk of breast cancer. However, the effect of different formulations, preparations and routes of administration is largely unknown. Estrogen only-therapy (ET) is, in general, not associated or weakly associated with breast cancer risk. We investigated the effect of hormone therapy (HT) with ET, EPT, and tibolone on risk of invasive breast cancer. Information on HT use was obtained from the Norwegian Prescription Database, and breast cancer incidence from the Cancer Registry of Norway. Poisson regression was used to estimate the incidence rate ratios (RR). We analyzed data from 686,614 Norwegian women, aged 45-79 years in January 2004, followed until December 2008, of whom 178,383 (26%) were prescribed HT. During the average 4.8 years of follow-up, 7,910 invasive breast cancers were registered. Compared with nonusers, current users of estradiol-norethisterone acetate (NETA)(EPT) had a RR of 2.74 (95% CI: 2.55-2.95). Users of the high dose estradiol-NETA formulation Kliogest V R had a RR of 3.26 (95% CI: 2.84-3.73), while users of the low dose Activelle V R had a RR of 2.76 (95% CI: 2.51-3.04). Current users of tibolone had a RR of 1.91 (95% CI: 1.61-2.28). Current users of ET with oral or transdermal estradiol had a RR of 1.40 (95% CI: 1.16-1.68), and 1.40 (95% CI: 1.00-1.95), respectively. The increased incidence rates approximates one extra invasive breast cancer case diagnosed for every 259 women using estradiol-NETA for one year, and one extra case for every 475 women using tibolone. In conclusion, use of estradiol-NETA and tibolone preparations is associated with an increased breast cancer risk.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Postmenopausal hormone therapy and the risk of breast cancer in Norway

Román

Sakshaug

Graff-Iversen

et al. 2015

Intl Journal of Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[13][14][15][16] Women diagnosed with a new primary breast cancer were ascertained through the New Mexico Tumor Registry (NMTR), a member of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Program of the National Cancer Institute. Women diagnosed with invasive or in situ breast carcinoma from January 1, 1992, through December 31,1994, who were residents of the state and between 20 and 80 years of age at diagnosis, were eligible for the study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Obesity and Risk of Breast Cancer Mortality in Hispanic and Non-Hispanic White Women: The New Mexico Women's Health Study

Connor

Baumgartner

Pinkston

et al. 2013

Journal of Women's Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Obesity is reported to be associated with poorer survival in women with breast cancer, regardless of menopausal status. Our purpose was to determine if the associations of obesity with breast cancer-specific, all-cause, and non-breast cancer mortality differ between Hispanic and non-Hispanic white (NHW) women with breast cancer. Data on lifestyle and medical history were collected for incident primary breast cancer cases (298 NHW, 279 Hispanic) in the New Mexico Women's Health Study. Mortality was ascertained through the National Death Index and New Mexico Tumor Registry over 13 years of follow-up. Adjusted Cox regression models indicated a trend towards increased risk for breast cancer-specific mortality in obese NHW women (hazard ratio [HR] 2.07; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98-4.35) but not in Hispanic women (HR 1.32; 95% CI 0.64-2.74). Obese NHW women had a statistically significant increased risk for all-cause mortality (HR 2.12; 95% CI 1.15-3.90) while Hispanic women did not (HR 1.23; 95% CI 0.71-2.12). Results were similar for non-breast cancer mortality: NHW (HR 2.65; 95% CI 0.90-7.81); Hispanic (HR 2.18; 95% CI 0.77-6.10). Our results suggest that obesity is associated with increased risk for breast cancer-specific mortality in NHW women; however, this association is attenuated in Hispanic women.

show abstract

“…A total of 22 studies were identified for possible inclusion (Persson et al, 1996(Persson et al, , 1997Magnusson et al, 1999;Li et al, 2000Li et al, , 2002Li et al, , 2003Moorman et al, 2000;Rockhill et al, 2000;Ross et al, 2000;Schairer et al, 2000;Chen et al, 2002;Daling et al, 2002;Kirsh and Kreiger, 2002;Newcomb et al, 2002;Newcomer et al, 2003;Porch et al, 2002;Ursin et al, 2002;Weiss et al, 2002;Chlebowski et al, 2003;Jernstrom et al, 2003;Million Women Study, 2003;Olsson et al, 2003;Stahlberg et al, 2004). As age at menopause is a critical factor in assessing HT use and breast cancer risk (Pike et al, 1998), we excluded those studies that did not adjust for age at menopause: this criterion excluded five studies (Persson et al, 1997;Moorman et al, 2000;Chen et al, 2002;Li et al, 2002Li et al, , 2003. We also excluded three studies that did not have information on risk by duration of EPT use (Persson et al, 1996;Li et al, 2000;Newcomer et al, 2003), and the study of Olsson et al (2003) for reasons described in the Discussion section below.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

An overview of menopausal oestrogen–progestin hormone therapy and breast cancer risk

2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results from the Women's Health Initiative (WHI) trial support findings from observational studies that oestrogen -progestin therapy (EPT) use is associated with an increase in breast cancer risk. We conducted a meta-analysis using EPT-specific results from the Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer (CGHFBC) pooled analysis and studies published since that report to obtain an overview of EPT use and breast cancer risk. We also assessed risk by histologic subtype of breast cancer, by schedule of the progestin component of EPT, and by recency of use. We estimate that overall, EPT results in a 7.6% increase in breast cancer risk per year of use. The risk was statistically significantly lower in US studies than in European studies -5.2 vs 7.9%. There was a significantly higher risk for continuous-combined than for sequential EPT use in Scandinavian studies where much higher total doses of progestin were used in continuous-combined than in sequential EPT. We observed no overall difference in risk for lobular vs ductal carcinoma but did observe a slightly higher risk for current vs past EPT use. The Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer (CGHFBC) (1997) pooled data from 51 epidemiologic studies to obtain an overall estimate of breast cancer risk associated with menopausal hormone therapy (HT) use. The risk estimate for oestrogen therapy (ET) use was based on large numbers of cases and controls, but the oestrogen -progestin therapy (EPT) result was not. Since then, a number of statistically powerful studies have evaluated EPT in relation to breast cancer risk. Some of these further evaluated differences in risk by schedule of progestin administration, that is, sequential vs continuous-combined use (Magnusson et al, 1999;Ross et al, 2000;Schairer et al, 2000;Newcomb et al, 2002;Porch et al, 2002;Weiss et al, 2002; Million Women Study, 2003;Olsson et al, 2003;Stahlberg et al, 2004), and in relation to histologic subtype of breast cancer (Schairer et al, 2000;Daling et al, 2002;Newcomb et al, 2002;Newcomer et al, 2003;Ursin et al, 2002;Weiss et al, 2002).We conducted a meta-analysis of the results reported by the CGHFBC and studies published since that overview through March 2004 to provide a more precise estimate of the risk from EPT and how it is affected by schedule of progestin administration and histologic subtype. MATERIALS AND METHODSWe used the Medline database to compile a list of studies subsequent to the CGHFBC report investigating the relationship between EPT and incident breast cancer risk using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH): postmenopausal, oestrogen progestin therapy (or combined therapy), and breast cancer. For this analysis we did not include studies that presented results only for overall HT, nor did we include studies that only evaluated ET use, nor studies only evaluating breast cancer mortality. A total of 22 studies were identified for possible inclusion (Persson et al, 1996(Persson et al, , 1997Magnusson et al, 1999;Li et al, 2000Li et al, , 2002Li et al, ,...

show abstract

Hormone replacement therapy and breast carcinoma risk in Hispanic and non‐Hispanic women

Cited by 28 publications

References 36 publications

Postmenopausal hormone therapy and the risk of breast cancer in Norway

Postmenopausal hormone therapy and the risk of breast cancer in Norway

Obesity and Risk of Breast Cancer Mortality in Hispanic and Non-Hispanic White Women: The New Mexico Women's Health Study

An overview of menopausal oestrogen–progestin hormone therapy and breast cancer risk

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About