Alcohol consumption and cigarette smoking in combination: A predictor of contralateral breast cancer risk in the WECARE study.

Alcohol drinking and, to a lesser extent, cigarette smoking are risk factors for a first primary breast cancer. Information on these behaviours at diagnosis may contribute to risk prediction of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and they are potentially modifiable. The WECARE Study is a large population-based case-control study of women with breast cancer where cases (N = 1,521) had asynchronous CBC and controls (N = 2,212), matched on survival time and other factors, had unilateral breast cancer (UBC). Using multivariable conditional logistic regression to estimate rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI), we examined the risk of CBC in relation to drinking and smoking history at and following first diagnosis. We adjusted for treatment, disease characteristics and other factors. There was some evidence for an association between CBC risk and current drinking or current smoking at the time of first breast cancer diagnosis, but the increased risk occurred primarily among women exposed to both (RR = 1.62, 95% CI 1.24-2.11). CBC risk was also elevated in women who both smoked and drank alcohol after diagnosis (RR = 1.54, 95% CI 1.18-1.99). In the subset of women with detailed information on amount consumed, smoking an average of ≥10 cigarettes per day following diagnosis was also associated with increased CBC risk (RR = 1.50, 95% CI 1.08-2.08; p-trend = 0.03). Among women with a diagnosis of breast cancer, information on current drinking and smoking could contribute to the prediction of CBC risk. Women who both drink and smoke may represent a group who merit targeted lifestyle intervention to modify their risk of CBC.

A restatement of the natural science evidence base concerning the health effects of low-level ionizing radiation.

Exposure to ionizing radiation is ubiquitous, and it is well established that moderate and high doses cause ill-health and can be lethal. The health effects of low doses or low dose-rates of ionizing radiation are not so clear. This paper describes a project which sets out to summarize, as a restatement, the natural science evidence base concerning the human health effects of exposure to low-level ionizing radiation. A novel feature, compared to other reviews, is that a series of statements are listed and categorized according to the nature and strength of the evidence that underpins them. The purpose of this restatement is to provide a concise entrée into this vibrant field, pointing the interested reader deeper into the literature when more detail is needed. It is not our purpose to reach conclusions on whether the legal limits on radiation exposures are too high, too low or just right. Our aim is to provide an introduction so that non-specialist individuals in this area (be they policy-makers, disputers of policy, health professionals or students) have a straightforward place to start. The summary restatement of the evidence and an extensively annotated bibliography are provided as appendices in the electronic supplementary material.

Dose and dose-rate effects of ionizing radiation: a discussion in the light of radiological protection.

The biological effects on humans of low-dose and low-dose-rate exposures to ionizing radiation have always been of major interest. The most recent concept as suggested by the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) is to extrapolate existing epidemiological data at high doses and dose rates down to low doses and low dose rates relevant to radiological protection, using the so-called dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor (DDREF). The present paper summarizes what was presented and discussed by experts from ICRP and Japan at a dedicated workshop on this topic held in May 2015 in Kyoto, Japan. This paper describes the historical development of the DDREF concept in light of emerging scientific evidence on dose and dose-rate effects, summarizes the conclusions recently drawn by a number of international organizations (e.g., BEIR VII, ICRP, SSK, UNSCEAR, and WHO), mentions current scientific efforts to obtain more data on low-dose and low-dose-rate effects at molecular, cellular, animal and human levels, and discusses future options that could be useful to improve and optimize the DDREF concept for the purpose of radiological protection.

Circulating levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D and risk of breast cancer: a nested case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Experimental evidence suggests a protective role for circulating 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) in breast cancer development, but the results of epidemiological studies have been inconsistent. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study nested within two prospective cohorts, the New York University Women's Health Study and the Northern Sweden Mammary Screening Cohort. Blood samples were collected at enrollment, and women were followed up for breast cancer ascertainment. In total, 1,585 incident breast cancer cases were individually-matched to 2,940 controls. Of these subjects, 678 cases and 1,208 controls contributed two repeat blood samples, at least one year apart. Circulating levels of 25(OH)D were measured, and multivariate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: No association was observed between circulating levels of 25(OH)D and overall breast cancer risk (multivariate-adjusted model OR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.76-1.16 for the highest vs. lowest quintile, ptrend = 0.30). The temporal reliability of 25(OH)D measured in repeat blood samples was high (intraclass correlation coefficients for season-adjusted 25(OH)D > 0.70). An inverse association between 25(OH)D levels and breast cancer risk was observed among women who were ≤ 45 years of age (ORQ5-Q1 = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.30-0.79, ptrend = 0.01) or premenopausal at enrollment (ORQ5-Q1 = 0.67, 95% CI = 0.48-0.92, ptrend = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Circulating 25(OH)D levels were not associated with breast cancer risk overall, although we could not exclude the possibility of a protective effect in younger women. Recommendations regarding vitamin D supplementation should be based on considerations other than breast cancer prevention.

Circulating prolactin levels and risk of epithelial ovarian cancer.

PURPOSE: Indirect evidence from experimental and epidemiological studies suggests that prolactin may be involved in ovarian cancer development. However, the relationship between circulating prolactin levels and risk of ovarian cancer is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study of 230 cases and 432 individually matched controls within three prospective cohorts to evaluate whether pre-diagnostic circulating prolactin is associated with subsequent risk of ovarian cancer. We also assessed whether lifestyle and reproductive factors are associated with circulating prolactin among controls. RESULTS: Prolactin levels were significantly lower among post- versus pre-menopausal women, parous versus nulliparous women, and past versus never users of oral contraceptives in our cross-sectional analysis of controls. In our nested case-control study, we observed a non-significant positive association between circulating prolactin and ovarian cancer risk (OR(Q4vsQ1) 1.56, 95 % CI 0.94, 2.63, p trend 0.15). Our findings were similar in multivariate-adjusted models and in the subgroup of women who donated blood ≥5 years prior to diagnosis. We observed a significant positive association between prolactin and risk for the subgroup of women with BMI ≥25 kg/m(2) (OR(Q4vsQ1) 3.10, 95 % CI 1.39, 6.90), but not for women with BMI <25 kg/m(2) (OR(Q4vsQ1) 0.81, 95 % CI 0.40, 1.64). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that prolactin may be associated with increased risk of ovarian cancer, particularly in overweight/obese women. Factors associated with reduced risk of ovarian cancer, such as parity and use of oral contraceptives, were associated with lower prolactin levels, which suggests that modulation of prolactin may be a mechanism underlying their association with risk.

Uncertainties in estimating health risks associated with exposure to ionising radiation.

The information for the present discussion on the uncertainties associated with estimation of radiation risks and probability of disease causation was assembled for the recently published NCRP Report No. 171 on this topic. This memorandum provides a timely overview of the topic, given that quantitative uncertainty analysis is the state of the art in health risk assessment and given its potential importance to developments in radiation protection. Over the past decade the increasing volume of epidemiology data and the supporting radiobiology findings have aided in the reduction of uncertainty in the risk estimates derived. However, it is equally apparent that there remain significant uncertainties related to dose assessment, low dose and low dose-rate extrapolation approaches (e.g. the selection of an appropriate dose and dose-rate effectiveness factor), the biological effectiveness where considerations of the health effects of high-LET and lower-energy low-LET radiations are required and the transfer of risks from a population for which health effects data are available to one for which such data are not available. The impact of radiation on human health has focused in recent years on cancer, although there has been a decided increase in the data for noncancer effects together with more reliable estimates of the risk following radiation exposure, even at relatively low doses (notably for cataracts and cardiovascular disease). New approaches for the estimation of hereditary risk have been developed with the use of human data whenever feasible, although the current estimates of heritable radiation effects still are based on mouse data because of an absence of effects in human studies. Uncertainties associated with estimation of these different types of health effects are discussed in a qualitative and semi-quantitative manner as appropriate. The way forward would seem to require additional epidemiological studies, especially studies of low dose and low dose-rate occupational and perhaps environmental exposures and for exposures to x rays and high-LET radiations used in medicine. The development of models for more reliably combining the epidemiology data with experimental laboratory animal and cellular data can enhance the overall risk assessment approach by providing biologically refined data to strengthen the estimation of effects at low doses as opposed to the sole use of mathematical models of epidemiological data that are primarily driven by medium/high doses. NASA's approach to radiation protection for astronauts, although a unique occupational group, indicates the possible applicability of estimates of risk and their uncertainty in a broader context for developing recommendations on: (1) dose limits for occupational exposure and exposure of members of the public; (2) criteria to limit exposures of workers and members of the public to radon and its short-lived decay products; and (3) the dosimetric quantity (effective dose) used in radiation protection.

Trends in Radiation Dose to the Contralateral Breast During Breast Cancer Radiation Therapy.

Over 4 million survivors of breast cancer live in the United States, 35% of whom were treated before 2009. Approximately half of patients with breast cancer receive radiation therapy, which exposes the untreated contralateral breast to radiation and increases the risk of a subsequent contralateral breast cancer (CBC). Radiation oncology has strived to reduce unwanted radiation dose, but it is unknown whether a corresponding decline in actual dose received to the untreated contralateral breast has occurred. The purpose of this study was to evaluate trends in unwanted contralateral breast radiation dose to inform risk assessment of second primary cancer in the contralateral breast for long-term survivors of breast cancer. Individually estimated radiation absorbed doses to the four quadrants and areola central area of the contralateral breast were estimated for 2,132 women treated with radiation therapy for local/regional breast cancers at age <55 years diagnosed between 1985 and 2008. The two inner quadrant doses and two outer quadrant doses were averaged. Trends in dose to each of the three areas of the contralateral breast were evaluated in multivariable models. The population impact of reducing contralateral breast dose on the incidence of radiation-associated CBC was assessed by estimating population attributable risk fraction (PAR) in a multivariable model. The median dose to the inner quadrants of the contralateral breast was 1.70 Gy; to the areola, 1.20 Gy; and to the outer quadrants, 0.72 Gy. Ninety-two percent of patients received ≥1 Gy to the inner quadrants. For each calendar year of diagnosis, dose declined significantly for each location, most rapidly for the inner quadrants (0.04 Gy/year). Declines in dose were similar across subgroups defined by age at diagnosis and body mass index. The PAR for CBC due to radiation exposure >1 Gy for women <40 years of age was 17%. Radiation dose-reduction measures have reduced dose to the contralateral breast during breast radiation therapy. Reducing the dose to the contralateral breast to <1 Gy could prevent an estimated 17% of subsequent radiation-associated CBCs for women treated under 40 years of age. These dose estimates inform CBC surveillance for the growing number of breast cancer survivors who received radiation therapy as young women in recent decades. Continued reductions in dose to the contralateral breast could further reduce the incidence of radiation-associated CBC.

Variants in activators and downstream targets of ATM, radiation exposure, and contralateral breast cancer risk in the WECARE study.

Ionizing radiation (IR) is a breast carcinogen that induces DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), and variation in genes involved in the DNA DSB response has been implicated in radiation-induced breast cancer. The Women's Environmental, Cancer, and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) study is a population-based study of cases with contralateral breast cancer (CBC) and matched controls with unilateral breast cancer. The location-specific radiation dose received by the contralateral breast was estimated from radiotherapy records and mathematical models. One hundred fifty-two SNPs in six genes (CHEK2, MRE11A, MDC1, NBN, RAD50, TP53BP1) involved in the DNA DSBs response were genotyped. No variants or haplotypes were associated with CBC risk (649 cases and 1,284 controls) and no variants were found to interact with radiation dose. Carriers of a RAD50 haplotype exposed to ≥1 gray (Gy) had an increased risk of CBC compared with unexposed carriers (Rate ratios [RR] = 4.31 [95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.93-9.62]); with an excess relative risk (ERR) per Gy = 2.13 [95% CI 0.61-5.33]). Although the results of this study were largely null, carriers of a haplotype in RAD50 treated with radiation had a greater CBC risk than unexposed carriers. This suggests that carriers of this haplotype may be susceptible to the DNA-damaging effects of radiation therapy associated with radiation-induced breast cancer.

Premenopausal serum androgens and breast cancer risk: a nested case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Prospective epidemiologic studies have consistently shown that levels of circulating androgens in postmenopausal women are positively associated with breast cancer risk. However, data in premenopausal women are limited. METHODS: A case-control study nested within the New York University Women's Health Study was conducted. A total of 356 cases (276 invasive and 80 in situ) and 683 individually-matched controls were included. Matching variables included age and date, phase, and day of menstrual cycle at blood donation. Testosterone, androstenedione, dehydroandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS) and sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG) were measured using direct immunoassays. Free testosterone was calculated. RESULTS: Premenopausal serum testosterone and free testosterone concentrations were positively associated with breast cancer risk. In models adjusted for known risk factors of breast cancer, the odds ratios for increasing quintiles of testosterone were 1.0 (reference), 1.5 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.9 to 2.3), 1.2 (95% CI, 0.7 to 1.9), 1.4 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.3) and 1.8 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.9; Ptrend = 0.04), and for free testosterone were 1.0 (reference), 1.2 (95% CI, 0.7 to 1.8), 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.3), 1.5 (95% CI, 0.9 to 2.3), and 1.8 (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.8, Ptrend = 0.01). A marginally significant positive association was observed with androstenedione (P = 0.07), but no association with DHEAS or SHBG. Results were consistent in analyses stratified by tumor type (invasive, in situ), estrogen receptor status, age at blood donation, and menopausal status at diagnosis. Intra-class correlation coefficients for samples collected from 0.8 to 5.3 years apart (median 2 years) in 138 cases and 268 controls were greater than 0.7 for all biomarkers except for androstenedione (0.57 in controls). CONCLUSIONS: Premenopausal concentrations of testosterone and free testosterone are associated with breast cancer risk. Testosterone and free testosterone measurements are also highly reliable (that is, a single measurement is reflective of a woman's average level over time). Results from other prospective studies are consistent with our results. The impact of including testosterone or free testosterone in breast cancer risk prediction models for women between the ages of 40 and 50 years should be assessed. Improving risk prediction models for this age group could help decision making regarding both screening and chemoprevention of breast cancer.

Body mass index and risk of second primary breast cancer: the WECARE Study.

The identification of potentially modifiable risk factors, such as body size, could allow for interventions that could help reduce the burden of contralateral breast cancer (CBC) among breast cancer survivors. Studies examining the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and CBC have yielded mixed results. From the population-based, case-control, Women's Environmental, Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) Study, we included 511 women with CBC (cases) and 999 women with unilateral breast cancer (controls) who had never used postmenopausal hormone therapy. Rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to assess the relationship between BMI and CBC risk. No associations between BMI at first diagnosis or weight-change between first diagnosis and date of CBC diagnosis (or corresponding date in matched controls) and CBC risk were seen. However, obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m(2)) postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor (ER)-negative first primary tumors (n = 12 cases and 9 controls) were at an increased risk of CBC compared with normal weight women (BMI < 25 kg/m(2)) (n = 43 cases and 98 controls) (RR = 5.64 (95% CI 1.76, 18.1)). No association between BMI and CBC risk was seen in premenopausal or postmenopausal women with ER-positive first primaries. Overall, BMI is not associated with CBC risk in this population of young breast cancer survivors. Our finding of an over five-fold higher risk of CBC in a small subgroup of obese postmenopausal women with an ER-negative first primary breast cancer is based on limited numbers and requires confirmation in a larger study.

Radiation dose and cataract surgery incidence in atomic bomb survivors, 1986-2005.

PURPOSE: To examine the incidence of clinically important cataracts in relation to lens radiation doses between 0 and approximately 3 Gy to address risks at relatively low brief doses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Informed consent was obtained, and human subjects procedures were approved by the ethical committee at the Radiation Effects Research Foundation. Cataract surgery incidence was documented for 6066 atomic bomb survivors during 1986-2005. Sixteen risk factors for cataract, such as smoking, hypertension, and corticosteroid use, were not confounders of the radiation effect on the basis of Cox regression analysis. Radiation dose-response analyses were performed for cataract surgery incidence by using Poisson regression analysis, adjusting for demographic variables and diabetes mellitus, and results were expressed as the excess relative risk (ERR) and the excess absolute risk (EAR) (ie, measures of how much radiation multiplies [ERR] or adds to [EAR] the risk in the unexposed group). RESULTS: Of 6066 atomic bomb survivors, 1028 underwent a first cataract surgery during 1986-2005. The estimated threshold dose was 0.50 Gy (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.10 Gy, 0.95 Gy) for the ERR model and 0.45 Gy (95% CI: 0.10 Gy, 1.05 Gy) for the EAR model. A linear-quadratic test for upward curvature did not show a significant quadratic effect for either the ERR or EAR model. The linear ERR model for a 70-year-old individual, exposed at age 20 years, showed a 0.32 (95% CI: 0.09, 0.53) [corrected] excess risk at 1 Gy. The ERR was highest for those who were young at exposure. CONCLUSION: These data indicate a radiation effect for vision-impairing cataracts at doses less than 1 Gy. The evidence suggests that dose standards for protection of the eye from brief radiation exposures should be 0.5 Gy or less.

Updated mortality analysis of the Mallinckrodt uranium processing workers, 1942-2012.

PURPOSE: Mallinckrodt Chemical Works (MCW) was the earliest uranium processing facility in the United States, and in 1942 produced the uranium oxide used for the first sustained and controlled nuclear fission chain-reaction at the University of Chicago. A second follow-up through 2012 was conducted of 2514 White male workers employed 1942-1966 at the MCW for dose-response analyses for selected causes of death. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Organ/tissue-specific dose reconstruction included both external (12,686 MCW film badge records, 210 other facility film badge records, and 31,297 occupational chest x-rays) and internal sources of uranium and radium (39,451 urine bioassays, 2341 breath radon measurements, and 6846 ambient radon measurements). Dust measurements from pitchblende facilitated quantitative risk estimates for non-radiogenic effects on the lung and kidney. Vital status was determined from multiple sources including the National Death Index and the Social Security Administration. Cox regression models were used for dose response analyses. RESULTS: Vital status was determined for 99% of the workers, of whom 75% had died. The mean lung dose from all sources of external and internal radiation combined was 69.9 mGy (maximum 885 mGy; percent workers >100 mGy, 10%) and there was no evidence for a dose response for lung cancer (Hazard Ratio (HR) of 0.95 (95% CI = 0.81-1.12) at 100 mGy). A significant association with radiation was found for kidney cancer (HR of 1.73 (95% CI = 1.04-2.79) at 100 mGy) and suggested for nonmalignant kidney diseases (HR of 1.30 (95% CI = 0.96-1.76) at 100 mGy). A non-radiation etiology could not be discounted, however, because of the possible renal toxicities of uranium, a heavy metal, and silica, a component of pitchblende dust. Non-significant HRs at 100 mGy for other sites of a priori interest were 0.36 (0.06-2.03) for leukemia other than CLL, 0.68 (0.17-2.77) for liver cancer, and 1.23 (0.79-1.90) for non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The HR at 100 mGy was 1.09 (0.99-1.20) for ischemic heart disease. An association was seen between dust and combined malignant and non-malignant lung disease, HR at 10 mgm-3year-1 of 1.01 (1.00-1.02). CONCLUSIONS: A positive radiation dose response was observed for malignant and non-malignant kidney disease, and a negative dose response for malignant and non-malignant lung disease. Cumulative measures of dust were significantly associated with malignant and non-malignant lung disease and suggested for malignant and non-malignant kidney disease. Small numbers preclude definitive interpretations which will await the combination with similar studies of early uranium processing workers.

Cox regression model with time-varying coefficients in nested case-control studies.

The nested case-control (NCC) design is a cost-effective sampling method to study the relationship between a disease and its risk factors in epidemiologic studies. NCC data are commonly analyzed using Thomas' partial likelihood approach under Cox's proportional hazards model with constant covariate effects. Here, we are interested in studying the potential time-varying effects of covariates in NCC studies and propose an estimation approach based on a kernel-weighted Thomas' partial likelihood. We establish asymptotic properties of the proposed estimator, propose a numerical approach to construct simultaneous confidence bands for time-varying coefficients, and develop a hypothesis testing procedure to detect time-varying coefficients. The proposed inference procedure is evaluated in simulations and applied to an NCC study of breast cancer in the New York University Women's Health Study.

Factors associated with inflammation markers, a cross-sectional analysis.

Epidemiological studies have reported associations between circulating inflammation markers and risk of chronic diseases. It is of interest to examine whether risk factors for these diseases are associated with inflammation. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis to evaluate whether reproductive and lifestyle factors and circulating vitamin D were associated with inflammation markers, including C-reactive protein, cytokines (IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-4, IL-5, IL-6, IL-10, IL-12p40, IL-12p70, IL-13, TNFα), and cytokine modulators (IL-1RA, sIL-1RII, sIL-2Ra, sIL-4R, sIL-6R, sTNF-R1/R2), among 616 healthy women. We confirmed associations of several inflammation markers with age and BMI. We also observed significantly higher levels of certain inflammation markers in postmenopausal vs. premenopausal women (TNFα, sIL-1RII, sIL-2Ra), with increasing parity (IL-12p40), and with higher circulating 25(OH) vitamin D (IL-13) and lower levels among current users of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (IL-1ß, IL-2, IL-10, IL-12p70, and IL-12p40), current smokers (IL-4, IL-13, IL-12p40), and women with a family history of breast or ovarian cancer (IL-4, IL-10, IL-13). Our findings suggest that risk factors for chronic diseases (age, BMI, menopausal status, parity, NSAID use, family history of breast and ovarian cancer, and smoking) are associated with inflammation markers in healthy women.

Adverse outcome pathways, key events, and radiation risk assessment.

The overall aim of this contribution to the 'Second Bill Morgan Memorial Special Issue' is to provide a high-level review of a recent report developed by a Committee for the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) titled 'Approaches for Integrating Information from Radiation Biology and Epidemiology to Enhance Low-Dose Health Risk Assessment'. It derives from previous NCRP Reports and Commentaries that provide the case for integrating data from radiation biology studies (available and proposed) with epidemiological studies (also available and proposed) to develop Biologically-Based Dose-Response (BBDR) models. In this review, it is proposed for such models to leverage the adverse outcome pathways (AOP) and key events (KE) approach for better characterizing radiation-induced cancers and circulatory disease (as the example for a noncancer outcome). The review discusses the current state of knowledge of mechanisms of carcinogenesis, with an emphasis on radiation-induced cancers, and a similar discussion for circulatory disease. The types of the various informative BBDR models are presented along with a proposed generalized BBDR model for cancer and a more speculative one for circulatory disease. The way forward is presented in a comprehensive discussion of the research needs to address the goal of enhancing health risk assessment of exposures to low doses of radiation. The use of an AOP/KE approach for developing a mechanistic framework for BBDR models of radiation-induced cancer and circulatory disease is considered to be a viable one based upon current knowledge of the mechanisms of formation of these adverse health outcomes and the available technical capabilities and computational advances. The way forward for enhancing low-dose radiation risk estimates will require there to be a tight integration of epidemiology data and radiation biology information to meet the goals of relevance and sensitivity of the adverse health outcomes required for overall health risk assessment at low doses and dose rates.

Coronary Artery Disease in Young Women After Radiation Therapy for Breast Cancer: The WECARE Study.

BACKGROUND: Radiation therapy (RT) for breast cancer increases risk of coronary artery disease (CAD). Women treated for left- vs right-sided breast cancer receive greater heart radiation exposure, which may further increase this risk. The risk of radiation-associated CAD specifically among younger breast cancer survivors is not well defined. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to report CAD risk among participants in the Women's Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology Study. METHODS: A total of 1,583 women who were <55 years of age when diagnosed with breast cancer between 1985 and 2008 completed a cardiovascular health questionnaire. Risk of radiation-associated CAD was evaluated by comparing women treated with left-sided RT with women treated with right-sided RT using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Effect modification by treatment and cardiovascular risk factors was examined. RESULTS: In total, 517 women who did not receive RT and 94 women who had a pre-existing cardiovascular disease diagnosis were excluded, leaving 972 women eligible for analysis. Their median follow-up time was 14 years (range 1-29 years). The 27.5-year cumulative incidences of CAD for women receiving left- vs right-sided RT were 10.5% and 5.8%, respectively (P = 0.010). The corresponding HR of CAD for left- vs right-sided RT in the multivariable Cox model was 2.5 (95% CI: 1.3-4.7). There was no statistically significant effect modification by any factor evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Young women treated with RT for left-sided breast cancer had over twice the risk of CAD compared with women treated with RT for right-sided breast cancer. Laterality of RT is independently associated with an increased risk of CAD and should be considered in survivorship care of younger breast cancer patients.

Circulating cytokines and risk of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a prospective study.

Cytokines play important roles in B-cell activation, proliferation, and apoptosis, thus may be etiologically related to risk of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL). However, the association between circulating levels of cytokines and B-NHL risk has not been prospectively studied in non-HIV populations. The objective of this study was to assess this association by conducting a case-control study nested within a prospective cohort of non-HIV-infected, healthy women. Fifteen cytokines were measured in samples collected a median of 8.2 years prior to diagnosis in 92 cases and two matched controls per case. Only cytokines that showed adequate temporal reproducibility over a two-year period were included. The odds ratio (OR) for the highest tertile relative to the lowest was elevated for soluble IL-2 receptor (sIL-2R) (OR = 2.5, 95% CI = 1.4-4.7, p (trend) < 0.01) and decreased for IL-13 (OR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.2-1.0, p (trend) = 0.05). Three other cytokines were marginally associated with risk of B-NHL: TNF-alpha (OR = 1.7, 95% CI = 0.9-3.3, p (trend) = 0.11), sTNF-R2 (OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 0.9-3.5, p (trend) = 0.06), and IL-5 (OR = 0.5, 95% CI = 0.3-1.0, p (trend) = 0.06). No association was observed between B-NHL risk and levels of the other cytokines measured (IL-1beta, IL-1RA, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, IL-10, IL-12, IL-12p70, CRP and sTNF-R1). This study suggests that dysregulated cytokines may be involved in B-NHL development.

A case-control study of the joint effect of reproductive factors and radiation treatment for first breast cancer and risk of contralateral breast cancer in the WECARE study.

OBJECTIVE: To examined the impact of reproductive factors on the relationship between radiation treatment (RT) for a first breast cancer and risk of contralateral breast cancer (CBC). METHODS: The Women's Environmental Cancer and Radiation Epidemiology (WECARE) Study is a multi-center, population-based case-control study where cases are women with asynchronous CBC (N = 1521) and controls are women with unilateral breast cancer (N = 2211). Rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated using conditional logistic regression to assess the independent and joint effects of RT (ever/never and location-specific stray radiation dose to the contralateral breast [0, >0-<1Gy, ≥1Gy]) and reproductive factors (e.g., parity). RESULTS: Nulliparous women treated with RT (≥1Gy dose) were at increased risk of CBC compared with nulliparous women not treated with RT, although this relationship did not reach statistical significance (RR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.87, 2.07). Women treated with RT who had an interval pregnancy (i.e., pregnancy after first diagnosis and before second diagnosis [in cases]/reference date [in controls]) had an increased risk of CBC compared with those who had an interval pregnancy with no RT (RR = 4.60, 95% CI 1.16, 18.28). This was most apparent for women with higher radiation doses to the contralateral breast. CONCLUSION: Among young female survivors of breast cancer, we found some evidence suggesting that having an interval pregnancy could increase a woman's risk of CBC following RT for a first breast cancer. While sampling variability precludes strong interpretations, these findings suggest a role for pregnancy and hormonal factors in radiation-associated CBC.

Radiation Treatment, ATM, BRCA1/2, and CHEK2*1100delC Pathogenic Variants and Risk of Contralateral Breast Cancer.

Whether radiation therapy (RT) affects contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk in women with pathogenic germline variants in moderate- to high-penetrance breast cancer-associated genes is unknown. In a population-based case-control study, we examined the association between RT; variants in ATM, BRCA1/2, or CHEK2*1100delC; and CBC risk. We analyzed 708 cases of women with CBC and 1399 controls with unilateral breast cancer, all diagnosed with first invasive breast cancer between 1985 and 2000 and aged younger than 55 years at diagnosis and screened for variants in breast cancer-associated genes. Rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using multivariable conditional logistic regression. RT did not modify the association between known pathogenic variants and CBC risk (eg, BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers without RT: RR = 3.52, 95% CI = 1.76 to 7.01; BRCA1/2 pathogenic variant carriers with RT: RR = 4.46, 95% CI = 2.96 to 6.71), suggesting that modifying RT plans for young women with breast cancer is unwarranted. Rare ATM missense variants, not currently identified as pathogenic, were associated with increased risk of RT-associated CBC (carriers of ATM rare missense variants of uncertain significance without RT: RR = 0.38, 95% CI = 0.09 to 1.55; carriers of ATM rare missense variants of uncertain significance with RT: RR = 2.98, 95% CI = 1.31 to 6.80). Further mechanistic studies will aid clinical decision-making related to RT.