| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Beral, V, et al.
(author)
-
Alcohol, tobacco and breast cancer - collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 58515 women with breast cancer and 95067 women without the disease
- 2002
-
In: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1532-1827 .- 0007-0920. ; 87, s. 1234-45
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Alcohol and tobacco consumption are closely correlated and published results on their association with breast cancer have not always allowed adequately for confounding between these exposures. Over 80% of the relevant information worldwide on alcohol and tobacco consumption and breast cancer were collated, checked and analysed centrally. Analyses included 58515 women with invasive breast cancer and 95067 controls from 53 studies. Relative risks of breast cancer were estimated, after stratifying by study, age, parity and, where appropriate, women's age when their first child was born and consumption of alcohol and tobacco. The average consumption of alcohol reported by controls from developed countries was 6.0 g per day, i.e. about half a unit/drink of alcohol per day, and was greater in ever-smokers than never-smokers, (8.4 g per day and 5.0 g per day, respectively). Compared with women who reported drinking no alcohol, the relative risk of breast cancer was 1.32 (1.19 - 1.45, P < 0.00001) for an intake of 35 - 44 g per day alcohol, and 1.46 (1.33 - 1.61, P < 0.00001) for greater than or equal to 45 g per day alcohol. The relative risk of breast cancer increased by 7.1% (95% CI 5.5-8.7%; P<0.00001) for each additional 10 g per day intake of alcohol, i.e. for each extra unit or drink of alcohol consumed on a daily basis. This increase was the same in ever-smokers and never-smokers (7.1 % per 10 g per day, P < 0.00001, in each group). By contrast, the relationship between smoking and breast cancer was substantially confounded by the effect of alcohol. When analyses were restricted to 22 255 women with breast cancer and 40 832 controls who reported drinking no alcohol, smoking was not associated with breast cancer (compared to never-smokers, relative risk for ever-smokers= 1.03, 95% CI 0.98 - 1.07, and for current smokers=0.99, 0.92 - 1.05). The results for alcohol and for tobacco did not vary substantially across studies, study designs, or according to 15 personal characteristics of the women; nor were the findings materially confounded by any of these factors. If the observed relationship for alcohol is causal, these results suggest that about 4% of the breast cancers in developed countries are attributable to alcohol. In developing countries, where alcohol consumption among controls averaged only 0.4 g per day, alcohol would have a negligible effect on the incidence of breast cancer. In conclusion, smoking has little or no independent effect on the risk of developing breast cancer; the effect of alcohol on breast cancer needs to be interpreted in the context of its beneficial effects, in moderation, on cardiovascular disease and its harmful effects on cirrhosis and cancers of the mouth, larynx, oesophagus and liver. (C) 2002 Cancer Research UK.
|
|
| 5. |
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Cook, Michael B, et al.
(author)
-
Tobacco and Alcohol in Relation to Male Breast Cancer: An Analysis of the Male Breast Cancer Pooling Project Consortium.
- 2015
-
In: Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. - 1538-7755. ; 24:3, s. 520-531
-
Journal article (peer-reviewed)abstract
- Background: The etiology of male breast cancer is poorly understood, partly due to its relative rarity. Although tobacco and alcohol exposures are known carcinogens, their association with male breast cancer risk remains ill-defined. Methods: The Male Breast Cancer Pooling Project consortium provided 2,378 cases and 51,959 controls for analysis from 10 case-control and 10 cohort studies. Individual participant data were harmonized and pooled. Unconditional logistic regression was used to estimate study design-specific (case-control/cohort) odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), which were then combined using fixed effects meta-analysis. Results: Cigarette smoking status, smoking pack-years, duration, intensity, and age at initiation were not associated with male breast cancer risk. Relations with cigar and pipe smoking, tobacco chewing, and snuff use were also null. Recent alcohol consumption and average grams of alcohol consumed per day were also not associated with risk; only one sub-analysis of very high recent alcohol consumption (>60 grams/day) was tentatively associated with male breast cancer (ORunexposed referent=1.29, 95%CI:0.97-1.71; OR>0-<7 g/day referent=1.36, 95%CI:1.04-1.77). Specific alcoholic beverage types were not associated with male breast cancer. Relations were not altered when stratified by age or body mass index. Conclusions: In this analysis of the Male Breast Cancer Pooling Project we found little evidence that tobacco and alcohol exposures were associated with risk of male breast cancer. Impact: Tobacco and alcohol do not appear to be carcinogenic for male breast cancer. Future studies should aim to assess these exposures in relation to subtypes of male breast cancer.
|
|
| 10. |
- Darby, S, et al.
(author)
-
Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery on 10-year recurrence and 15-year breast cancer death : meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10,801 women in 17 randomised trials
- 2011
-
In: The Lancet. - 0140-6736 .- 1474-547X. ; 378:9804, s. 16-1707
-
Research review (peer-reviewed)abstract
- BACKGROUND: After breast-conserving surgery, radiotherapy reduces recurrence and breast cancer death, but it may do so more for some groups of women than for others. We describe the absolute magnitude of these reductions according to various prognostic and other patient characteristics, and relate the absolute reduction in 15-year risk of breast cancer death to the absolute reduction in 10-year recurrence risk.METHODS: We undertook a meta-analysis of individual patient data for 10,801 women in 17 randomised trials of radiotherapy versus no radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery, 8337 of whom had pathologically confirmed node-negative (pN0) or node-positive (pN+) disease.FINDINGS: Overall, radiotherapy reduced the 10-year risk of any (ie, locoregional or distant) first recurrence from 35·0% to 19·3% (absolute reduction 15·7%, 95% CI 13·7-17·7, 2p<0·00001) and reduced the 15-year risk of breast cancer death from 25·2% to 21·4% (absolute reduction 3·8%, 1·6-6·0, 2p=0·00005). In women with pN0 disease (n=7287), radiotherapy reduced these risks from 31·0% to 15·6% (absolute recurrence reduction 15·4%, 13·2-17·6, 2p<0·00001) and from 20·5% to 17·2% (absolute mortality reduction 3·3%, 0·8-5·8, 2p=0·005), respectively. In these women with pN0 disease, the absolute recurrence reduction varied according to age, grade, oestrogen-receptor status, tamoxifen use, and extent of surgery, and these characteristics were used to predict large (≥20%), intermediate (10-19%), or lower (<10%) absolute reductions in the 10-year recurrence risk. Absolute reductions in 15-year risk of breast cancer death in these three prediction categories were 7·8% (95% CI 3·1-12·5), 1·1% (-2·0 to 4·2), and 0·1% (-7·5 to 7·7) respectively (trend in absolute mortality reduction 2p=0·03). In the few women with pN+ disease (n=1050), radiotherapy reduced the 10-year recurrence risk from 63·7% to 42·5% (absolute reduction 21·2%, 95% CI 14·5-27·9, 2p<0·00001) and the 15-year risk of breast cancer death from 51·3% to 42·8% (absolute reduction 8·5%, 1·8-15·2, 2p=0·01). Overall, about one breast cancer death was avoided by year 15 for every four recurrences avoided by year 10, and the mortality reduction did not differ significantly from this overall relationship in any of the three prediction categories for pN0 disease or for pN+ disease.INTERPRETATION: After breast-conserving surgery, radiotherapy to the conserved breast halves the rate at which the disease recurs and reduces the breast cancer death rate by about a sixth. These proportional benefits vary little between different groups of women. By contrast, the absolute benefits from radiotherapy vary substantially according to the characteristics of the patient and they can be predicted at the time when treatment decisions need to be made.FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, British Heart Foundation, and UK Medical Research Council.
|
|
