4.6 Article

The Association of a Breast Cancer Diagnosis With Serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D Concentration Over Time

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 188, 期 4, 页码 637-645

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwy285

关键词

breast cancer; 25-hydroxyvitamin D; reliability; reverse causation bias; vitamin D

资金

  1. Office of Dietary Supplements (National Institutes of Health) Research Scholars Program grant
  2. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [Z01-ES044005, Z01-ES102245]
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SCIENCES [ZIAES049033, ZIAES044005, ZIAES102245, ZIAES049032] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Prospective and retrospective studies of vitamin D levels and breast cancer have produced discrepant results. This may be due to variations in serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) concentrations over time, including systematic changes after breast cancer diagnosis. We measured total serum 25(OH)D levels in participants from the Sister Study, a US cohort study of sisters of breast cancer patients, who provided samples at baseline (2003-2009) and 4-10 years later (2013-2015). This included 827 women with an intervening breast cancer and 771 women without one. Although 25(OH)D levels were modestly correlated over time (R = 0.42), 25(OH)D concentrations increased in both groups, with larger increases among cases (averaging 31.6 ng/mL at baseline and 43.5 ng/mL at follow-up) than among controls (32.3 ng/mL at baseline, 40.4 ng/mL at follow-up). Consequently, the estimated association between 25(OH)D and breast cancer depended on whether baseline measurements (per 10-ng/mL increase, odds ratio = 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.78, 0.98) or measurements from the second blood draw (per 10-ng/mL increase, odds ratio = 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.08, 1.26) were used. Concentrations were related to regular use (4 times/week) of vitamin D supplements, which became more common over time; increases in regular use were greater in cases (from 56% to 84%) than in controls (from 56% to 77%). Our results do not explain previously observed differences between retrospective and prospective studies, but they do demonstrate how reverse causation and temporal trends in exposure can distort inference.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据