Smoking before the birth of a first child is not associated with increased risk of breast cancer: findings from the British Women's Heart and Health Cohort Study and a meta-analysis

It has been suggested that the period between puberty and first birth is a time when the breast is particularly susceptible to carcinogenic effects. In a cohort of 3047 women aged 60-79 years (N=139 breast cancer cases), we found no association between smoking before the birth of a first child and breast cancer risk: fully adjusted (for age, number of children, age at birth of first child, age at menarche, age at menopausal, hysterectomy and/or oophorectomy, ever use of oral contraception, use of hormone replacement therapy, alcohol consumption, body mass index, childhood and adulthood social class) odds ratio 1.06 (95% confidence interval: 0.72, 1.56). The pooled estimate from a meta-analysis of our study and 11 previously published studies (N=6528 cases) was 1.07 (0.94, 1.22). We conclude that smoking prior to the birth of a first child is not associated with increased risk of breast cancer

Options for early breast cancer follow-up in primary and secondary care : a systematic review

Background Both incidence of breast cancer and survival have increased in recent years and there is a need to review follow up strategies. This study aims to assess the evidence for benefits of follow-up in different settings for women who have had treatment for early breast cancer. Method A systematic review to identify key criteria for follow up and then address research questions. Key criteria were: 1) Risk of second breast cancer over time - incidence compared to general population. 2) Incidence and method of detection of local recurrence and second ipsi and contra-lateral breast cancer. 3) Level 1–4 evidence of the benefits of hospital or alternative setting follow-up for survival and well-being. Data sources to identify criteria were MEDLINE, EMBASE, AMED, CINAHL, PSYCHINFO, ZETOC, Health Management Information Consortium, Science Direct. For the systematic review to address research questions searches were performed using MEDLINE (2011). Studies included were population studies using cancer registry data for incidence of new cancers, cohort studies with long term follow up for recurrence and detection of new primaries and RCTs not restricted to special populations for trials of alternative follow up and lifestyle interventions. Results Women who have had breast cancer have an increased risk of a second primary breast cancer for at least 20 years compared to the general population. Mammographically detected local recurrences or those detected by women themselves gave better survival than those detected by clinical examination. Follow up in alternative settings to the specialist clinic is acceptable to women but trials are underpowered for survival. Conclusions Long term support, surveillance mammography and fast access to medical treatment at point of need may be better than hospital based surveillance limited to five years but further large, randomised controlled trials are needed

Active and passive smoking and the risk of breast cancer in women aged 36–45 years: a population based case–control study in the UK

Active smoking has little or no effect on breast cancer risk but some investigators have suggested that passive smoking and its interaction with active smoking may be associated with an increased risk. In a population based case–control study of breast cancer in women aged 36–45 years at diagnosis, information on active smoking, passive smoking in the home, and other factors, was collected at interview from 639 cases and 640 controls. Women were categorised jointly by their active and passive smoking exposure. Among never smoking controls, women who also reported no passive smoking exposure were significantly more likely to be nulliparous and to be recent users of oral contraceptives. Among those never exposed to passive smoking, there was no significant association between active smoking and breast cancer, relative risk (RR) of 1.12 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72–1.73) for past smokers and RR of 1.19 (95% CI 0.72–1.95) for current smokers, nor was there an association with age started, duration or intensity of active smoking. Compared with women who were never active nor passive smokers, there was no significant association between passive smoking in the home and breast cancer risk in never smokers, RR of 0.89 (95% CI 0.64–1.25), in past smokers, RR of 1.09 (95% CI 0.75–1.56), or in current smokers, RR of 0.93 (95% CI 0.67–1.30). There was no trend with increasing duration of passive smoking and there was no heterogeneity among any of the subgroups examined. In this study, there was no evidence of an association between either active smoking or passive smoking in the home and risk of breast cancer

Target and reality of adjuvant endocrine therapy in postmenopausal patients with invasive breast cancer

Previous research evaluating the use of adjuvant endocrine therapy among postmenopausal breast cancer patients showed with 15–50% wide ranges of non-adherence rates. We evaluated this issue by analysing an unselected study group comprising of 325 postmenopausal women, diagnosed from 1997 to 2003 with hormonal receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. The different clinical situations that led to the discontinuation of adjuvant endocrine therapy were clearly defined and differentiated: non-adherence was not simply the act of stopping medication, but rather the manifestation of an intentional behaviour of the patient. Of the 287 patients who initiated endocrine therapy, 191 (66.6%) fully completed this treatment. Thirty-one patients (10.8%) showed non-adherence to therapy. Patients who had follow-up with a general practitioner, rather than in an oncologic unit, were more likely to be non-adherent (P=0.0088). Of 25 patients who changed medication due to therapy-related adverse effects, 20 (80%) patients fully completed the therapy after drug change. In adjuvant endocrine therapy, a lowering of the non-adherence rate to 10.8%, the lowest reported in the literature, is realistic when patients are cared for by a specialised oncologic unit focusing on the individual needs of the patients

Second breast cancers in a Tuscan case series: characteristics, prognosis, and predictors of survival

Little is known about long-term outcomes following a second breast cancer diagnosis. We describe the epidemiology, characteristics and prognosis of second breast cancers in an Italian cohort. We identified women with two breast cancer diagnoses from 24 278 histology records at a Tuscan breast cancer service between 1980 and 2005, and determined their survival status. Disease-specific survival from second diagnosis was examined using Cox regression analyses. Second cancers were identified in 1044 women with a median age of 60 years. In all 455 were ipsilateral relapses and 589 were contralateral cancers. Median time between first and second diagnosis was 63.4 months. The majority of second cancers was small invasive or in situ tumours. Estimated 10-year survival from a second cancer diagnosis was 78%. Survival was poorest when the second cancer was large (HR=2.26) or node-positive (HR=3.43), when the time between the two diagnoses was <5 years (HR=1.45), or when the diagnosis was in an earlier epoch (HR=2.20). Second tumours were more likely to be large or node-positive if the first breast cancer had these features. Prognosis following a second breast cancer in this cohort was generally good. However, large or node-positive second tumours, and shorter intervals between diagnoses were indicators of poorer survival

Smoking duration before first childbirth: an emerging risk factor for breast cancer? Results from 302,865 Norwegian women

This article is part of Eivind Bjerkaas' doctoral thesis which is available in Munin at http://hdl.handle.net/10037/6799Purpose: Recently, The International Agency for Research on Cancer classified cigarette smoking as possibly carcinogenic to the human breast. Since some new cohort studies have suggested that this risk is confined to women who started to smoke before first childbirth, we wanted to examine the association between smoking and breast cancer, with a focus on time of smoking initiation in relation to the first childbirth. Methods: We followed 302,865 Norwegian women born between 1899 and 1975, recruited from 1974 to 2003, by linkage to national registries through December 2007. We used Cox proportional hazard models to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI). Results: During more than 4.1 million person-years of follow-up, we ascertained 7,490 cases of primary invasive breast cancer. Compared with never smokers, ever smokers had a 15 % (HR = 1.15, 95 % CI 1.10–1.21) increased risk of breast cancer overall and also a significantly increased risk of breast cancer in the three most exposed categories of age at smoking initiation (parous women), number of cigarettes smoked per day, years of smoking duration and number of pack-years. Ever smokers who started to smoke more than 1 year after the first childbirth had not an increased risk (HR = 0.93, 95 % CI 0.86–1.02), while those who initiated smoking more than 10 years before their first childbirth had a 60 % (HR = 1.60, 95 % CI 1.42–1.80) increased risk of breast cancer, compared with never smokers

Cancer screening and preventative care among long-term cancer survivors in the United Kingdom

BACKGROUND: Long-term cancer survivors in the United Kingdom are mostly followed up in a primary care setting by their general practitioner; however, there is little research on the use of services. This study examines whether cancer survivors receive adequate screening and preventative care in UK primary care. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified a cohort of long-term survivors of breast, colorectal and prostate cancer with at least a 5-year survival using the General Practice Research Database, with controls matched for age, gender and practice. We compared adherence with cancer screening and the use of preventative care between cancer survivors and controls. RESULTS: The cancer survivors' cohort consisted of 18 612 breast, 5764 colorectal and 4868 prostate cancer survivors. Most cancer survivors receive cancer screening at the same levels as controls, except for breast cancer survivors who were less likely to receive a mammogram than controls (OR=0.78, 95% CI: 0.66-0.92). Long-term cancer survivors received comparable levels of influenza vaccinations and cholesterol tests, but breast (OR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.74-0.87) and prostate cancer survivors (OR=0.70, 95% CI: 0.57-0.87) were less likely to receive a blood pressure test. All survivors were more likely to receive bone densitometry. CONCLUSION: The provision and uptake of preventive care in a primary care setting in the United Kingdom is comparable between the survivors of three common cancers and those who have not had cancer. However, long-term breast cancer survivors in this cohort were less likely to receive a mammogra