Cochrane Occupational Safety and Health Review Group, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Kuopio, Finland.
Scand J Work Environ Health. 2013 Sep 1;39(5):431-47. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.3371. Epub 2013 Jun 26.
The aim of this review was to synthesize the evidence on the potential relationship between nightshift work and breast cancer.
We searched multiple databases for studies comparing women in shift work to those with no-shift work reporting incidence of breast cancer. We calculated incremental risk ratios (RR) per five years of night-shift work and per 300 night shift increases in exposure and combined these in a random effects dose-response meta-analysis. We assessed study quality in ten domains of bias.
We identified 16 studies: 12 case-control and 4 cohort studies. There was a 9% risk increase per five years of night-shift work exposure in case-control studies [RR 1.09, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.02-1.20; I (2) = 37%, 9 studies], but not in cohort studies (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.97-1.05; I (2) = 53%, 3 studies). Heterogeneity was significant overall (I (2) = 55%, 12 studies). Results for 300 night shifts were similar (RR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.10; I (2) = 58%, 8 studies). Sensitivity analysis using exposure transformations such as cubic splines, a fixed-effect model, or including only better quality studies did not change the results. None of the 16 studies had a low risk of bias, and 6 studies had a moderate risk.
Based on the low quality of exposure data and the difference in effect by study design, our findings indicate insufficient evidence for a link between night-shift work and breast cancer. Objective prospective exposure measurement is needed in future studies.
本综述旨在综合夜班工作与乳腺癌之间潜在关系的证据。
我们检索了多个数据库,以比较轮班工作和无轮班工作的女性报告的乳腺癌发病率。我们计算了每五年夜班工作和每增加 300 个夜班暴露的增量风险比(RR),并在随机效应剂量-反应荟萃分析中对这些数据进行了组合。我们评估了偏倚的十个领域的研究质量。
我们共确定了 16 项研究:12 项病例对照研究和 4 项队列研究。病例对照研究中,每五年夜班工作暴露风险增加 9%[RR 1.09,95%置信区间(95%CI)1.02-1.20;I (2) = 37%,9 项研究],但队列研究中无此关联(RR 1.01,95%CI 0.97-1.05;I (2) = 53%,3 项研究)。总体而言,异质性显著(I (2) = 55%,12 项研究)。300 个夜班的结果相似(RR 1.04,95%CI 1.00-1.10;I (2) = 58%,8 项研究)。使用暴露转换(如三次样条、固定效应模型)或仅纳入质量较高的研究进行敏感性分析,结果并未改变。16 项研究中均无低偏倚风险研究,其中 6 项研究存在中度偏倚风险。
基于暴露数据质量低和研究设计对效应的影响差异,我们的发现表明夜班工作与乳腺癌之间的关联证据不足。未来的研究需要采用客观的前瞻性暴露测量方法。