Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA 98109-1024, USA.
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010 Jun;19(6):1643-54. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0188. Epub 2010 May 25.
Biological distinctions between histologic subtypes of breast cancer suggest etiologic differences, although few studies have been powered to examine such differences. We compared associations between several factors and risk of ductal, lobular, and mixed ductal-lobular breast cancers.
We used risk factor data from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium for 3,331,744 mammograms on 1,211,238 women, including 19,119 women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer following mammography (n = 14,818 ductal, 1,602 lobular, and 1,601 mixed ductal-lobular). Histologic subtype-specific risk factor associations were evaluated using Cox regression.
Significant positive associations with family history and breast density were similar across subtypes. Hormone therapy use was associated with increased risk of all subtypes, but was most strongly associated with lobular cancer [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.46; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.25-1.70]. Relative to nulliparous women, parous women had lower risk of ductal and mixed but not lobular cancers (HR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.76-0.84; HR = 0.79; 95% CI, 0.68-0.93; HR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.81-1.15, respectively). Late age at first birth was associated with increased risk of all subtypes.
Similarities in risk factor associations with ductal, lobular, and mixed breast cancer subtypes were more pronounced than differences. Distinctions between subtype-specific associations were limited to analyses of hormone therapy use and reproductive history.
The results of this study indicate that the strongest risk factors for breast cancer overall (that is, family history and breast density) are not histologic subtype specific. Additional studies are needed to better characterize subtype-specific associations with genetic, hormonal, and nonhormonal factors.
乳腺癌组织学亚型之间存在生物学差异,提示存在病因学差异,但很少有研究有足够的能力来检验这些差异。我们比较了几种因素与导管癌、小叶癌和混合性导管小叶癌风险之间的关联。
我们使用乳腺癌监测联盟的风险因素数据,对 1211238 名女性的 3331744 次乳房 X 光检查进行了分析,其中包括 19119 名经乳房 X 光检查诊断为浸润性乳腺癌的女性(n=14818 例导管癌、1602 例小叶癌和 1601 例混合性导管小叶癌)。采用 Cox 回归评估组织学亚型特异性风险因素的相关性。
家族史和乳腺密度与各亚型均呈显著正相关。激素治疗与所有亚型的风险增加相关,但与小叶癌的相关性最强[风险比(HR)=1.46;95%置信区间(CI),1.25-1.70]。与未生育的女性相比,生育过的女性患导管癌和混合性乳腺癌的风险较低,但患小叶癌的风险较高(HR=0.80;95%CI,0.76-0.84;HR=0.79;95%CI,0.68-0.93;HR=0.96;95%CI,0.81-1.15)。首次生育年龄较晚与所有亚型的风险增加相关。
导管癌、小叶癌和混合性乳腺癌亚型之间的风险因素相关性相似,差异不明显。亚型特异性关联的区别仅限于激素治疗使用和生殖史的分析。
本研究结果表明,乳腺癌的最强危险因素(即家族史和乳腺密度)与组织学亚型无关。需要进一步研究以更好地描述与遗传、激素和非激素因素相关的亚型特异性关联。