4.7 Article

Family History of Breast or Prostate Cancer and Prostate Cancer Risk

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 24, 期 23, 页码 5910-5917

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0370

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI/NIH [U01 CA167552, R01 CA034944, 4P30CA006516, T32 CA09001-39]
  2. Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center SPORE in Prostate Cancer [P50CA090381]
  3. NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE [P50CA090381, T32CA009001, P30CA006516, U01CA167552] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: Breast and prostate cancer co-occur in families, and women with a family history of prostate cancer are at increased breast cancer risk. Prostate cancer is among the most heritable cancers, but few studies have investigated its association with familial breast cancer. The objective of this study is to investigate the extent to which familial breast or prostate cancer in first-degree relatives increases prostate cancer risk. Experimental Design: A prospective study of 37,002 U.S. men in the Health Professionals Follow-up Study. During the 16-year follow-up to 2012, 4,208 total and 344 lethal cases were diagnosed. Using cause-specific hazards regression, we estimated the multivariable HRs and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for associations between familial breast or prostate cancer and total and lethal prostate cancer. Results: Those with familial breast cancer had a 21% greater risk of prostate cancer overall (95% CI, 1.10-1.34), and a 34% greater risk of lethal disease (HR 1.34; 95% CI, 0.96-1.89). Family history of prostate cancer alone was associated with a 68% increased risk of total disease (95% CI, 1.53-1.83) and a 72% increased risk of lethal disease (95% CI, 1.25-2.38). Men with a family history of both cancers were also at elevated risk. Conclusions: Our study found that men with a family history of breast or prostate cancer had elevated prostate cancer risks, including risk of lethal disease. These findings have translational relevance for cancer risk prediction in men.

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