Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25261318›Full record

SynthesisInternational archives of occupational and environmental health2015

Circadian disrupting exposures and breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis.

Chunla He, Sonia Taj Anand, Mark H Ebell, John E Vena, Sara Wagner Robb

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in International archives of occupational and environmental health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 80 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
80citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
8.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

80 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 160 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

20 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chunla HeDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, College of Public Health, University of Georgia, 101 Buck Road, Health Sciences Campus, B.S. Miller Hall, Athens, GA, 30602, USA, willahe@uga.edu.
Sonia Taj Anand
Mark H Ebell
John E Vena
Sara Wagner Robb
University of Georgia · USMedical University of South Carolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeShift work, short sleep duration, employment as a flight attendant, and exposure to light at night, all potential causes of circadian disruption, have been inconsistently associated with breast cancer (BrCA) risk. The aim of this meta-analysis is to quantitatively evaluate the combined and independent effects of exposure to different sources of circadian disruption on BrCA risk in women.

methodsRelevant studies published through January 2014 were identified by searching the PubMed database. The pooled relative risks (RRs) and corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using fixed- or random effects models as indicated by heterogeneity tests. Generalized least squares trend test was used to assess dose-response relationships.

resultsA total of 28 studies, 15 on shift work, 7 on short sleep duration, 3 on flight attendants, and 6 on light at night were included in the analysis. The combined analysis suggested a significantly positive association between circadian disruption and BrCA risk (RR = 1.14; 95 % CI 1.08-1.21). Separate analyses showed that the RR for BrCA was 1.19 (95 % CI 1.08-1.32) for shift work, 1.120 (95 % CI 1.119-1.121) for exposure to light at night, 1.56 (95 % CI 1.10-2.21) for employment as a flight attendant, and 0.96 (95 % CI 0.86-1.06) for short sleep duration. A dose-response analysis showed that each 10-year increment of shift work was associated with 16 % higher risk of BrCA (95 % CI 1.06-1.27) based on selected case-control studies. No significant dose-response effects of exposure to light at night and sleep deficiency were found on BrCA risk.

conclusionsOur meta-analysis demonstrates that circadian disruption is associated with an increased BrCA risk in women. This association varied by specific sources of circadian disrupting exposures, and a dose-response relationship remains uncertain. Therefore, future rigorous prospective studies are needed to confirm these relationships.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansOccupational ExposurePhotoperiodRisk FactorsSleep Disorders, Circadian RhythmTime FactorsWork Schedule Tolerance

Identifiers

PMID25261318
OpenAlexW2043538134

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.