Advertisement

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 109, Issue 1, pp 77–90 | Cite as

Low-dose medical radiation exposure and breast cancer risk in women under age 50 years overall and by estrogen and progesterone receptor status: results from a case–control and a case–case comparison

  • Huiyan Ma
  • Colin K. Hill
  • Leslie Bernstein
  • Giske UrsinEmail author
Epidemiology

Abstract

Although moderate to high-dose ionizing radiation exposure is an established risk factor for breast cancer, the effect of low-dose radiation exposure has not been clarified by epidemiological data. We evaluated the effect of low-dose radiation from medical procedures on risk of breast cancer overall and by joint estrogen and progesterone receptor (ER/PR) status in 1,742 population-based case patients aged 20–49 years and 441 control subjects identified from neighbourhoods of case patients in Los Angeles County. After excluding radiation exposures in the 5 years prior to case’s diagnosis or control’s initial household contact date we found an elevated breast cancer risk among women who reported having had multiple chest X-rays (P trend  = 0.0007) or 7 or more mammograms (odds ratio [OR] = 1.80, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.95–3.42). Risk was also increased among women who received dental X-rays without lead apron protection before age 20 years (OR = 1.81, 95% CI = 1.13–2.90). Women, who had their first exposure to these medical radiation procedures during childhood, had a greater increase in risk than those who were first exposed at older ages. Although not statistically significantly different, risk estimates were somewhat stronger for nulliparous than for parous women. We found no effect modification by ER/PR status. In conclusion, our findings support the hypothesis that low-dose ionizing radiation, and particularly exposures during childhood, increase breast cancer risk.

Keywords

Breast cancer Medical radiation Estrogen receptor Progesterone receptor Case–control study 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors are deeply grateful to the study interviewers and to Ms. Juliana Bamrick for managing the data collection activities. This study was supported by grants CA17054 and CA74847 from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, 4PB-0092 from the California Breast Cancer Research Program of the University of California, and grant P30 ES 07048 from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. The collection of cancer incidence data used in this publication was supported by the California Department of Health Services as part of the statewide cancer reporting program mandated by California Health and Safety Code Section 103885; the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program under contract N01-PC-35139 and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Program of Cancer Registries, under agreement #U55/CCR921930-02. The ideas and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors, and no endorsement by the State of California, Department of Health Services, the National Cancer Institute, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or their contractors and subcontractors is intended or should be inferred.

References

  1. 1.
    Ronckers CM, Erdmann CA, Land CE (2005) Radiation and breast cancer: a review of current evidence. Breast Cancer Res 7:21–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wakeford R (2004) The cancer epidemiology of radiation. Oncogene 23:6404–6428PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Valentin J (2001) Radiation and your patient: a guide for medical practitioners. ICRP Supporting Guidance 2., Ann ICRPGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kruger RL, Schueler BA (2001) A survey of clinical factors and patient dose in mammography. Med Phys 28:1449–1454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Young KC, Burch A (2000) Radiation doses received in the UK Breast Screening Programme in 1997 and 1998. Br J Radiol 73:278–287PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brenner DJ, Doll R, Goodhead DT et al (2003) Cancer risks attributable to low doses of ionizing radiation: assessing what we really know. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 100:13761–13766PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rothkamm K, Lobrich M (2003) Evidence for a lack of DNA double-strand break repair in human cells exposed to very low X-ray doses. Proc Natl Acad Sci U.S.A. 100:5057–5062PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zheng T, Holford TR, Mayne ST et al (2002) Radiation exposure from diagnostic and therapeutic treatments and risk of breast cancer. Eur J Cancer Prev 11:229–235PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Huang WY, Newman B, Millikan RC et al (2000) Hormone-related factors and risk of breast cancer in relation to estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor status. Am J Epidemiol 151:703–714PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hill DA, Preston-Martin S, Ross RK et al (2002) Medical radiation, family history of cancer, and benign breast disease in relation to breast cancer risk in young women, USA. Cancer Causes Control 13:711–718PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ma H, Bernstein L, Ross RK et al (2006) Hormone-related factors and breast cancer risk of women under age 50 years by estrogen and progesterone receptor status. Breast Cancer Res 8(4):R39Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bernstein L, Henderson BE, Hanisch R et al (1994) Physical exercise and reduced risk of breast cancer in young women. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:1403–1408PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marchbanks PA, McDonald JA, Wilson HG et al (2002) The NICHD Women’s Contraceptive and Reproductive Experiences Study: methods and operational results. Ann Epidemiol 12:213–221PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Darby SC, Doll R, Gill SK et al (1987) Long term mortality after a single treatment course with X-rays in patients treated for ankylosing spondylitis. Br J Cancer 55:179–190PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Land CE, Tokunaga M, Koyama K et al (2003) Incidence of female breast cancer among atomic bomb survivors, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 1950–1990. Radiat Res 160:707–717PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Preston DL, Mattsson A, Holmberg E et al (2002) Radiation effects on breast cancer risk: a pooled analysis of eight cohorts. Radiat Res 158:220–235PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S (2000) Applied logistic regression. A Wiley-Interscience Publication, New York, NYGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rothman KJ, Greenland S (1998) Modern epidemiology. Lippincott-Raven, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sankaranarayanan K, Wassom JS (2005) Ionizing radiation and genetic risks XIV. Potential research directions in the post-genome era based on knowledge of repair of radiation-induced DNA double-strand breaks in mammalian somatic cells and the origin of deletions associated with human genomic disorders. Mutat Res 578:333–370PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Brenner DJ, Sawant SG, Hande MP et al (2002) Routine screening mammography: how important is the radiation-risk side of the benefit-risk equation? Int J Radiat Biol 78:1065–1067PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Frankenberg D, Kelnhofer K, Garg I et al (2002) Enhanced mutation and neoplastic transformation in human cells by 29 kVp relative to 200 kVp X rays indicating a strong dependence of RBE on photon energy. Radiat Prot Dosimetry 99:261–264PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Goggelmann W, Jacobsen C, Panzer W et al (2003) Re-evaluation of the RBE of 29 kV X-rays (mammography X-rays) relative to 220 kV X-rays using neoplastic transformation of human CGL1-hybrid cells. Radiat Environ Biophys 42:175–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Heyes GJ, Mill AJ (2004) The neoplastic transformation potential of mammography X rays and atomic bomb spectrum radiation. Radiat Res 162:120–127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Boice JD Jr, Monson RR (1977) Breast cancer in women after repeated fluoroscopic examinations of the chest. J Natl Cancer Inst 59:823–832PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mattsson A, Ruden BI, Hall P et al (1993) Radiation-induced breast cancer: long-term follow-up of radiation therapy for benign breast disease. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:1679–1685PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Swerdlow AJ, Barber JA, Hudson GV et al (2000) Risk of second malignancy after Hodgkin’s disease in a collaborative British cohort: the relation to age at treatment. J Clin Oncol 18:498–509PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tokunaga M, Land CE, Tokuoka S et al (1994) Incidence of female breast cancer among atomic bomb survivors, 1950–1985. Radiat Res 138:209–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Land CE, Hayakawa N, Machado SG et al (1994) A case–control interview study of breast cancer among Japanese A-bomb survivors. II. Interactions with radiation dose. Cancer Causes Control 5:167–176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Russo J, Rivera R, Russo IH (1992) Influence of age and parity on the development of the human breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 23:211–218PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Russo J, Mailo D, Hu YF et al (2005) Breast differentiation and its implication in cancer prevention. Clin Cancer Res 11:931s–936sPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Millikan RC, Player JS, Decotret AR et al (2005) Polymorphisms in DNA repair genes, medical exposure to ionizing radiation, and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14:2326–2334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Preston-Martin S, Bernstein L, Maldonado AA et al (1985) A dental X-ray validation study. Comparison of information from patient interviews and dental charts. Am J Epidemiol 121:430–439PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Berrington de Gonzalez A, Ekbom A, Glass AG et al (2003) Comparison of documented and recalled histories of exposure to diagnostic X-rays in case–control studies of thyroid cancer. Am J Epidemiol 157:652–663CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huiyan Ma
    • 1
  • Colin K. Hill
    • 2
  • Leslie Bernstein
    • 3
  • Giske Ursin
    • 4
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Institute for Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Research, Keck School of MedicineUniversity of Southern CaliforniaAlhambraUSA
  2. 2.Department of Radiation Oncology, Keck School of MedicineUniversity of Southern California/Norris, Comprehensive Cancer CenterLos AngelesUSA
  3. 3.Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of MedicineUniversity of Southern California/Norris, Comprehensive Cancer CenterLos AngelesUSA
  4. 4.Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of MedicineUniversity of Southern California/Norris Comprehensive Cancer CenterLos AngelesUSA
  5. 5.Department of NutritionUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations