4.7 Article

Reproductive and hormonal risk factors for luminal, HER2-overexpressing, and triple-negative breast cancer in Japanese women

期刊

ANNALS OF ONCOLOGY
卷 23, 期 9, 页码 2435-2441

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdr613

关键词

breast cancer; HER2 overexpressing; luminal; menarche; menopause; triple negative

类别

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, Culture and Technology of Japan
  2. Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan
  3. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24590776] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although the clinical relevance of the molecular subtypes of breast cancer is evident, etiological differences among subtypes have not been well established, especially among Asian. Here, we evaluated the hypothesis that the etiologic impact of reproductive and hormonal features differs among molecular subtypes. We conducted a case-control study in pre- and postmenopausal Japanese. We examined 706 breast cancer patients and 1412 age- and menopausal status-matched noncancer controls. Immunohistochemical stains for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) were used to classify the cases into 554 luminal (hormone receptor positive), 84 HER2-overexpressing (hormone receptor negative, HER2 positive), and 68 triple-negative cases (hormone receptor negative, HER2 negative). Associations were evaluated using multivariate polytomous logistic regression models. A significant association was observed between early age at menarche and risk of luminal disease (odds ratios = 1.67, 95% confidence interval: 1.22-2.29; P trend = 0.001). No significant differences in association with parity, age at first live birth, breastfeeding history, age at menopause, or synthetic hormonal use were seen across molecular subtypes of breast cancer. These findings indicate that reproductive events in adolescence have differential impact on the risk of breast cancer molecular subtypes in Japanese.

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

4.7
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