4.4 Article

Attributable causes of breast cancer and ovarian cancer in China: Reproductive factors, oral contraceptives and hormone replacement therapy

期刊

CHINESE JOURNAL OF CANCER RESEARCH
卷 24, 期 1, 页码 9-17

出版社

CHINESE JOURNAL CANCER RESEARCH CO
DOI: 10.1007/s11670-012-0009-y

关键词

Reproductive factors; Oral contraceptives; Hormone replacement therapy; Cancer; Population attributable fraction

类别

资金

  1. International Agency for Research on Cancer (Lyon, France) [CRA No GEE/08/19]
  2. Vanderbilt University [R24 TW007988]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To provide an evidence-based, consistent assessment of the burden of breast cancer attributable to reproductive factors (RFs, including nulliparity, mean number of children, age at first birth and breastfeeding), use of oral contraceptives (OCs, restricted to the age group of 15-49 years), and hormone replacement therapy (HRT), as well as of the burden of ovarian cancer attributable to the mean number of children in China in 2005. We derived the prevalence of these risk factors and the relative risk of breast and ovarian cancer from national surveys or large-scale studies conducted in China. In the case of RFs, we compared the exposure distributions in 2001 and counterfactual exposure. Exposure of RFs in 2001 was found to account for 6.74% of breast cancer, corresponding to 9,617 cases and 2,769 deaths, and for 2.78% of ovarian cancer (711 cases, 294 deaths). The decrease in mean number of children alone was responsible for 1.47% of breast cancer and 2.78% of ovarian cancer. The prevalence of OC use was 1.74% and the population attributable fraction (PAF) of breast cancer was 0.71%, corresponding to 310 cases and 90 deaths. The PAF of breast cancer due to HRT was 0.31%, resulting in 297 cases and 85 deaths. RFs changes in China contributed to a sizable fraction of breast and ovarian cancer incidence and mortality, whereas HRT and OCs accounted for relatively low incidence of breast cancer in China.

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

4.4
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