Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29464445›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2018

Night shift work and breast cancer: a pooled analysis of population-based case-control studies with complete work history.

Emilie Cordina-Duverger, Florence Menegaux, Alexandru Popa, Sylvia Rabstein, Volker Harth, Beate Pesch, Thomas Brüning, Lin Fritschi, Deborah C Glass, Jane S Heyworth and 9 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 89 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
89citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
10.7field-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

89 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 191 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Shift Work and Prostate Cancer: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

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

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

19 authors at 11 institutions in 6 countries.

Emilie Cordina-DuvergerInserm, Center for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health (CESP), Cancer and Environment team, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.
Florence MenegauxInserm, Center for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health (CESP), Cancer and Environment team, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.
Alexandru PopaInserm, Center for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health (CESP), Cancer and Environment team, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France.
Sylvia RabsteinInstitute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr-Universität Bochum (IPA), Bochum, Germany.
Volker HarthInstitute for Occupational and Maritime Medicine (ZfAM), University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (UKE), Hamburg, Germany.
Beate PeschInstitute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr-Universität Bochum (IPA), Bochum, Germany.
Thomas BrüningInstitute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine of the German Social Accident Insurance, Institute of the Ruhr-Universität Bochum (IPA), Bochum, Germany.
Lin FritschiSchool of Public Health, Curtin University, Perth, Australia.
Deborah C GlassDepartment of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Jane S HeyworthSchool of Population and Global Health, The University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia.
Thomas C ErrenInstitute and Policlinic for Occupational Medicine, Environmental Medicine and Prevention Research, University Hospital of Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Gemma Castaño-VinyalsIS Global, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Barcelona, Spain.
Kyriaki PapantoniouIS Global, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Barcelona, Spain.
Ana EspinosaIS Global, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Barcelona, Spain.
Manolis KogevinasIS Global, Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology (CREAL), Barcelona, Spain.
Anne GrundyCRCHUM (Centre de recherche du CHUM), Montreal, QC, Canada.
John J SpinelliPopulation Oncology, BC Cancer, Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Kristan J AronsonDepartment of Public Health Sciences and Cancer Research Institute, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, Canada.
Pascal GuénelInserm, Center for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health (CESP), Cancer and Environment team, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France. pascal.guenel@inserm.fr.ORCID 0000-0002-8359-518X
Universitat Pompeu Fabra · ESUniversité Paris-Sud · FRInstitute for Prevention and Occupational Medicine · DECentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal · CACurtin University · AUMonash University · AUQueen's University · CAThe University of Western Australia · AUUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Cologne · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Night shift work has been suspected to increase breast cancer risk but epidemiological studies have been inconsistent due to heterogeneous assessment of exposure to night work. To overcome this limitation, we pooled data of five population-based case-control studies from Australia, Canada, France, Germany, and Spain into a single harmonized dataset using a common definition of night work including 6093 breast cancer cases and 6933 population controls. The odds ratio for breast cancer in women who ever worked at night for at least 3 h between midnight and 5 a.m. as compared to never night workers was 1.12 (95% CI 1.00-1.25). Among pre-menopausal women, this odds ratio was 1.26 [1.06-1.51], increasing to 1.36 [1.07-1.74] for night shifts ≥ 10 h, 1.80 [1.20-2.71] for work ≥ 3 nights/week, and 2.55 [1.03-6.30] for both duration of night work ≥ 10 years and exposure intensity ≥ 3 nights/week. Breast cancer risk in pre-menopausal women was higher in current or recent night workers (OR = 1.41 [1.06-1.88]) than in those who had stopped night work more than 2 years ago. Breast cancer in post-menopausal women was not associated with night work whatever the exposure metric. The increase in risk was restricted to ER+ tumors, particularly those who were both ER+ and HER2+ . These results support the hypothesis that night shift work increases the risk of breast cancer in pre-menopausal women, particularly those with high intensity and long duration of exposure. Risk difference between pre- and post-menopausal women deserves further scrutiny.

Indexed as

Circadian RhythmWork Schedule ToleranceBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansRisk AssessmentShift Work ScheduleBreast cancerCase–control studyCircadian disruptionNight shift workPooled analysis

Identifiers

PMID29464445
OpenAlexW2788454556

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.