Statin use, hyperlipidaemia, and the risk of breast cancer

Hydroxymethyl glutaryl coenzyme A inhibitors (‘statins’) are carcinogenic in rodents and an increased incidence of breast cancer was reported among pravastatin users in one randomised trial. We conducted a case–control study in the General Practice Research Database to evaluate the risk of breast cancer among 50- to 79-year old women treated with statins for hyperlipidaemia. Case and control women were matched by age, general practice, duration of prescription history in the General Practice Research Database, and index date. Adjusting for history of benign breast disease, body mass index, and use of hormone replacement therapy, women currently treated with statins had an estimated relative risk for breast cancer of 1.0 (95% confidence interval 0.6–1.6) compared to women without hyperlipidaemia. Untreated hyperlipidaemia was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer (estimated relative risk 1.6; 95% confidence interval 1.1–2.5). The estimated relative risk among women currently receiving only non-statin lipid-lowering drugs was similar to that of women with untreated hyperlipidaemia (1.8; 95% confidence interval 0.9–3.4). We found no evidence for an increasing trend in breast cancer risk with increasing duration of statin use (median duration 1.8 years, maximum 8.6 years)

The Breast Cancer and the Environment Research Centers: Transdisciplinary Research on the Role of the Environment in Breast Cancer Etiology

ObjectivesWe introduce and describe the Breast Cancer and the Environment Research Centers (BCERC), a research network with a transdisciplinary approach to elucidating the role of environmental factors in pubertal development as a window on breast cancer etiology. We describe the organization of four national centers integrated into the BCERC network.Data sourcesInvestigators use a common conceptual framework based on multiple levels of biologic, behavioral, and social organization across the life span. The approach connects basic biologic studies with rodent models and tissue culture systems, a coordinated multicenter epidemiologic cohort study of prepubertal girls, and the integration of community members of breast cancer advocates as key members of the research team to comprise the network.Data extractionRelevant literature is reviewed that describes current knowledge across levels of organization. Individual research questions and hypotheses in BCERC are driven by gaps in our knowledge that are presented at genetic, metabolic, cellular, individual, and environmental (physical and social) levels.Data synthesisAs data collection on the cohort, animal experiments, and analyses proceed, results will be synthesized through a transdisciplinary approach.ConclusionCenter investigators are addressing a large number of specific research questions related to early pubertal onset, which is an established risk factor for breast cancer. BCERC research findings aimed at the primary prevention of breast cancer will be disseminated to the scientific community and to the public by breast cancer advocates, who have been integral members of the research process from its inception

Investigating the complex genetic architecture of ankle-brachial index, a measure of peripheral arterial disease, in non-Hispanic whites

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Atherosclerotic peripheral arterial disease (PAD) affects 8–10 million people in the United States and is associated with a marked impairment in quality of life and an increased risk of cardiovascular events. Noninvasive assessment of PAD is performed by measuring the ankle-brachial index (ABI). Complex traits, such as ABI, are influenced by a large array of genetic and environmental factors and their interactions. We attempted to characterize the genetic architecture of ABI by examining the main and interactive effects of individual single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and conventional risk factors.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We applied linear regression analysis to investigate the association of 435 SNPs in 112 positional and biological candidate genes with ABI and related physiological and biochemical traits in 1046 non-Hispanic white, hypertensive participants from the Genetic Epidemiology Network of Arteriopathy (GENOA) study. The main effects of each SNP, as well as SNP-covariate and SNP-SNP interactions, were assessed to investigate how they contribute to the inter-individual variation in ABI. Multivariable linear regression models were then used to assess the joint contributions of the top SNP associations and interactions to ABI after adjustment for covariates. We reduced the chance of false positives by 1) correcting for multiple testing using the false discovery rate, 2) internal replication, and 3) four-fold cross-validation.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>When the results from these three procedures were combined, only two SNP main effects in <it>NOS3</it>, three SNP-covariate interactions (<it>ADRB2 </it>Gly 16 – lipoprotein(a) and <it>SLC4A5 </it>– diabetes interactions), and 25 SNP-SNP interactions (involving SNPs from 29 different genes) were significant, replicated, and cross-validated. Combining the top SNPs, risk factors, and their interactions into a model explained nearly 18% of variation in ABI in the sample. SNPs in six genes (<it>ADD2, ATP6V1B1, PRKAR2B, SLC17A2, SLC22A3, and TGFB3</it>) were also influencing triglycerides, C-reactive protein, homocysteine, and lipoprotein(a) levels.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>We found that candidate gene SNP main effects, SNP-covariate and SNP-SNP interactions contribute to the inter-individual variation in ABI, a marker of PAD. Our findings underscore the importance of conducting systematic investigations that consider context-dependent frameworks for developing a deeper understanding of the multidimensional genetic and environmental factors that contribute to complex diseases.</p

Expert consensus document: A 'diamond' approach to personalized treatment of angina.

In clinical guidelines, drugs for symptomatic angina are classified as being first choice (β-blockers, calcium-channel blockers, short-acting nitrates) or second choice (ivabradine, nicorandil, ranolazine, trimetazidine), with the recommendation to reserve second-choice medications for patients who have contraindications to first-choice agents, do not tolerate them, or remain symptomatic. No direct comparisons between first-choice and second-choice treatments have demonstrated the superiority of one group of drugs over the other. Meta-analyses show that all antianginal drugs have similar efficacy in reducing symptoms, but provide no evidence for improvement in survival. The newer, second-choice drugs have more evidence-based clinical data that are more contemporary than is available for traditional first-choice drugs. Considering some drugs, but not others, to be first choice is, therefore, difficult. Moreover, double or triple therapy is often needed to control angina. Patients with angina can have several comorbidities, and symptoms can result from various underlying pathophysiologies. Some agents, in addition to having antianginal effects, have properties that could be useful depending on the comorbidities present and the mechanisms of angina, but the guidelines do not provide recommendations on the optimal combinations of drugs. In this Consensus Statement, we propose an individualized approach to angina treatment, which takes into consideration the patient, their comorbidities, and the underlying mechanism of disease

New Pharmacological Agents to Aid Smoking Cessation and Tobacco Harm Reduction: What has been Investigated and What is in the Pipeline?

A wide range of support is available to help smokers to quit and aid attempts at harm reduction, including three first-line smoking cessation medications: nicotine replacement therapy, varenicline and bupropion. Despite the efficacy of these, there is a continual need to diversify the range of medications so that the needs of tobacco users are met. This paper compares the first-line smoking cessation medications to: 1) two variants of these existing products: new galenic formulations of varenicline and novel nicotine delivery devices; and 2) twenty-four alternative products: cytisine (novel outside of central and eastern Europe), nortriptyline, other tricyclic antidepressants, electronic cigarettes, clonidine (an anxiolytic), other anxiolytics (e.g. buspirone), selective 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) reuptake inhibitors, supplements (e.g. St John’s wort), silver acetate, nicobrevin, modafinil, venlafaxine, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOI), opioid antagonist, nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (nAChR) antagonists, glucose tablets, selective cannabinoid type 1 receptor antagonists, nicotine vaccines, drugs that affect gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) transmission, drugs that affect N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors (NMDA), dopamine agonists (e.g. levodopa), pioglitazone (Actos; OMS405), noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors, and the weight management drug lorcaserin. Six criteria are used: relative efficacy, relative safety, relative cost, relative use (overall impact of effective medication use), relative scope (ability to serve new groups of patients), and relative ease of use (ESCUSE). Many of these products are in the early stages of clinical trials, however, cytisine looks most promising in having established efficacy and safety and being of low cost. Electronic cigarettes have become very popular, appear to be efficacious and are safer than smoking, but issues of continued dependence and possible harms need to be considered

Cardiovasc Diabetol

Lower-extremity arterial disease (LEAD) is a major endemic disease with an alarming increased prevalence worldwide. It is a common and severe condition with excess risk of major cardiovascular events and death. It also leads to a high rate of lower-limb adverse events and non-traumatic amputation. The American Diabetes Association recommends a widespread medical history and clinical examination to screen for LEAD. The ankle brachial index (ABI) is the first non-invasive tool recommended to diagnose LEAD although its variable performance in patients with diabetes. The performance of ABI is particularly affected by the presence of peripheral neuropathy, medial arterial calcification, and incompressible arteries. There is no strong evidence today to support an alternative test for LEAD diagnosis in these conditions. The management of LEAD requires a strict control of cardiovascular risk factors including diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidaemia. The benefit of intensive versus standard glucose control on the risk of LEAD has not been clearly established. Antihypertensive, lipid-lowering, and antiplatelet agents are obviously worthfull to reduce major cardiovascular adverse events, but few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated the benefits of these treatments in terms of LEAD and its related adverse events. Smoking cessation, physical activity, supervised walking rehabilitation and healthy diet are also crucial in LEAD management. Several advances have been achieved in endovascular and surgical revascularization procedures, with obvious improvement in LEAD management. The revascularization strategy should take into account several factors including anatomical localizations of lesions, medical history of each patients and operator experience. Further studies, especially RCTs, are needed to evaluate the interest of different therapeutic strategies on the occurrence and progression of LEAD and its related adverse events in patients with diabetes

Cancer Screening: The Journey from Epidemiology to Policy

Purpose: Cancer screening procedures have brought great benefit to the public's health. However, the science of cancer screening and the evidence arising from research in this field as it is applied to policy is complex and has been difficult to communicate, especially on the national stage. We explore how epidemiologists have contributed to this evidence base and to its translation into policy. Methods: Our essay focuses on breast and lung cancer screening to identify commonalities of experience by epidemiologists across two different cancer sites and describe how epidemiologists interact with evolving scientific and policy environments. Results: We describe the roles and challenges that epidemiologists encounter according to the maturity of the data, stakeholders, and the related political context. We also explore the unique position of cancer screening as influenced by the legislative landscape where, due to recent healthcare reform, cancer screening research plays directly into national policy. Conclusions: In the complex landscape for cancer screening policy, epidemiologists can increase their impact by learning from past experiences, being well prepared and communicating effectively. © 2012 Elsevier Inc