Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18990757›Full record

ArticleCancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology2008

Menopausal hormone therapy and breast cancer risk in the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Study Cohort.

Louise A Brinton, Douglas Richesson, Michael F Leitzmann, Gretchen L Gierach, Arthur Schatzkin, Traci Mouw, Albert R Hollenbeck, James V Lacey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Prediagnostic Sex Steroid Hormones in Relation to Male Breast Cancer Risk.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2015
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Louise A BrintonHormonal and Reproductive Epidemiology Branch, Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute, USA. brinton@nih.gov
Douglas Richesson
Michael F Leitzmann
Gretchen L Gierach
Arthur Schatzkin
Traci Mouw
Albert R Hollenbeck
James V Lacey

Funding

Hormone-Related CancersZIACP010126 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI GIERACH, GRETCHEN · 2009 to 2025
$103.5M
HORMONE-RELATED CANCERSZ01CP010126 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI BRINTON, LOUISE · 1996 to 2008
$11.2M
Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer in the AARP CohortZ01CP010196 · NCI · DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY AND GENETICS · PI SCHATZKIN, ARTHUR · 2008 to 2008
$1.5M
CLINICAL/IMMUNOLOGIC/GENETIC ANALYSES OF AUTOIMMUNE LYMPHOPROLIFERATIVE SYNDROMEZ01AI000732 · NIAID · NIAID EXTRAMURAL ACTIVITIES · PI RAO, VEMULKONDA · 1995 to 2008
$1.1M
Intramural NIH HHS Z01 CP010126
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResults from the Women's Health Initiative trial raise new questions regarding the effects of estrogen therapy (ET) and estrogen plus progestin therapy (EPT) on breast cancer risk.

methodsWe analyzed data from 126,638 females, ages 50 to 71 years at baseline, who completed two questionnaires (1995--1996 and 1996--1997) as part of the NIH-AARP Diet and Health Cohort Study and in whom 3,657 incident breast cancers were identified through June 30, 2002. Hormone-associated relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of breast cancer were estimated via multivariable regression models.

resultsAmong thin women (body mass index < 25 kg/m2), ET use was associated with a significant 60% excess risk after 10 years of use. EPT was associated with a significantly increased risk among women with intact uteri, with the highest risk among current, long-term (> or = 10 years) users (RR, 2.44; 95% CI, 2.13-2.79). These risks were slightly higher when progestins were prescribed continuously than sequentially (< 15 days/mo; respective RRs of 2.76 versus 2.01). EPT associations were strongest in thin women, but elevated risks persisted among heavy women. EPT use was strongly related to estrogen receptor (ER)-positive tumors, requiring consideration of this variable when assessing relationships according to other clinical features. For instance, ER- ductal tumors were unaffected by EPT use, but all histologic subgroups of ER+ tumors were increased, especially low-grade and mixed ductal-lobular tumors.

conclusionsBoth ET and EPT were associated with breast cancer risks with the magnitude of increase varying according to body mass and clinical characteristics of the tumors.

Indexed as

AgedBreast NeoplasmsDietEstrogen Replacement TherapyFemaleHumansIncidenceMenopauseMiddle AgedProportional Hazards ModelsProspective StudiesRisk FactorsSurveys and QuestionnairesUnited States

Identifiers

PMID18990757
PMCPMC2755180

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.