Circadian disrupting exposures and breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis
- 2k Downloads
Shift 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.
Relevant 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.
A 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.
Our 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.
KeywordsCircadian disruption Breast cancer Meta-analysis
This work was funded, in part, by the Georgia Cancer Coalition (Proposal 038505) to the Cancer Epidemiology, Prevention and Control Program (CEPC) at the Georgia Cancer Center.
Conflict of interest
The authors have declared no conflict of interests.
- Greenland S, Longnecker MP (1992) Methods for trend estimation from summarized dose-response data, with applications to meta-analysis. Am J Epidemiol 135(11):1301–1309Google Scholar
- Greenland S, Thomas DC (1982) On the need for the rare disease assumption in case-control studies. Am J Epidemiol 116(3):547–553Google Scholar
- Grundy A et al (2013) Increased risk of breast cancer associated with long-term shift work in Canada. Occup Environ Med. doi: 10.1136/oemed-2013-101482
- Menegaux F et al (2012) Night work and breast cancer: a population-based case–control study in France (the CECILE study). Int J Cancer. doi: 10.1002/ijc.27669
- Orsini NBR, Greenland S (2006) Generalized least squares for trend estimation of summarized dose-response data. Stata J 6:40–70Google Scholar
- Pilcher JJ, Lambert BJ, Huffcutt AI (2000) Differential effects of permanent and rotating shifts on self-report sleep length: a meta-analytic review. Sleep 23(2):155–163Google Scholar
- Wells GA et al. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp