Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Traditional breast cancer risk factors in relation to molecular subtypes of breast cancer

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

At least four major categories of invasive breast cancer have been reproducibly identified by gene expression profiling: luminal A, luminal B, HER2-type, and basal-like. These subtypes have been shown to differ in their outcome and response to treatment. Whether this heterogeneity reflects the evolution of these subtypes through distinct etiologic pathways has not been clearly defined. We evaluated the association between traditional breast cancer risk factors and risk of previously defined molecular subtypes of breast cancer in the Nurses’ Health Study. This analysis included 2,022 invasive breast cancer cases for whom we were able to obtain archived breast cancer tissue specimens. Tissue microarrays (TMAs) were constructed, and slides were immunostained for estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6), and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Using immunostain results in combination with histologic grade, cases were grouped into molecularly defined subtypes. We used Cox proportional hazards models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We observed differences in the association between risk factors and subtypes of breast cancer. In general, many reproductive factors were most strongly associated with the luminal A subtype, although these differences were not statistically significant. Weight gain since age 18 showed significant differences in its association with molecular subtypes (P-heterogeneity = 0.05) and was most strongly associated with the luminal B subtype (P-trend 0.001). Although there was not significant heterogeneity for lactation across subtypes, an inverse association was strongest for basal-like tumors (HR = 0.6, 95% CI 0.4–0.8; P-heterogeneity = 0.88). These results support the hypothesis that different subtypes of breast cancer have different etiologies and should not be considered as a single group. Identifying risk factors for less common subtypes such as luminal B, HER2-type and basal-like tumors has important implications for prevention of these more aggressive subtypes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Perou CM, Jeffrey SS, van de Rijn M, Rees CA, Eisen MB, Ross DT, Pergamenschikov A, Williams CF, Zhu SX, Lee JC et al (1999) Distinctive gene expression patterns in human mammary epithelial cells and breast cancers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96(16):9212–9217

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, Aas T, Geisler S, Johnsen H, Hastie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS et al (2001) Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98(19):10869–10874

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, Hastie T, Marron JS, Nobel A, Deng S, Johnsen H, Pesich R, Geisler S et al (2003) Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100(14):8418–8423

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Brenton JD, Carey LA, Ahmed AA, Caldas C (2005) Molecular classification and molecular forecasting of breast cancer: ready for clinical application? J Clin Oncol 23(29):7350–7360

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Colditz GA, Rosner BA, Chen WY, Holmes MD, Hankinson SE (2004) Risk factors for breast cancer according to estrogen and progesterone receptor status. J Natl Cancer Inst 96(3):218–228

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ma H, Bernstein L, Pike MC (2006) Ursin G Reproductive factors and breast cancer risk according to joint estrogen and progesterone receptor status: a meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. Breast Cancer Res 8(4):R43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Nielsen TO, Hsu FD, Jensen K, Cheang M, Karaca G, Hu Z, Hernandez-Boussard T, Livasy C, Cowan D, Dressler L et al (2004) Immunohistochemical and clinical characterization of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 10(16):5367–5374

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Abd El-Rehim DM, Ball G, Pinder SE, Rakha E, Paish C, Robertson JF, Macmillan D, Blamey RW, Ellis IO (2005) High-throughput protein expression analysis using tissue microarray technology of a large well-characterised series identifies biologically distinct classes of breast cancer confirming recent cDNA expression analyses. Int J Cancer 116(3):340–350

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Abd El-Rehim DM, Pinder SE, Paish CE, Bell J, Blamey RW, Robertson JF, Nicholson RI, Ellis IO (2004) Expression of luminal and basal cytokeratins in human breast carcinoma. J Pathol 203(2):661–671

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. van de Rijn M, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, Haas P, Kallioniemi O, Kononen J, Torhorst J, Sauter G, Zuber M, Kochli OR et al (2002) Expression of cytokeratins 17 and 5 identifies a group of breast carcinomas with poor clinical outcome. Am J Pathol 161(6):1991–1996

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Missmer SA, Eliassen AH, Barbieri RL, Hankinson SE (2004) Endogenous estrogen, androgen, and progesterone concentrations and breast cancer risk among postmenopausal women. J Natl Cancer Inst 96(24):1856–1865

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Colditz GA, Hankinson SE (2005) The nurses’ health study: lifestyle and health among women. Nat Rev Cancer 5(5):388–396

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tamimi RM, Baer HJ, Marotti J, Galan M, Galaburda L, Fu Y, Deitz AC, Connolly JL, Schnitt SJ, Colditz GA et al (2008) Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 10(4):R67 PMCID: PMC2575540

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Collins LC, Marotti JD, Baer HJ, Tamimi RM (2008) Comparison of estrogen receptor results from pathology reports with results from central laboratory testing. J Natl Cancer Inst 100(3):218–221

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Collins LC, Botero ML, Schnitt SJ (2005) Bimodal frequency distribution of estrogen receptor immunohistochemical staining results in breast cancer: an analysis of 825 cases. Am J Clin Pathol 123:16–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Yang XR, Sherman ME, Rimm DL, Lissowska J, Brinton LA, Peplonska B, Hewitt SM, Anderson WF, Szeszenia-Dabrowska N, Bardin-Mikolajczak A et al (2007) Differences in risk factors for breast cancer molecular subtypes in a population-based study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 16(3):439–443

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Millikan RC, Newman B, Tse CK, Moorman PG, Conway K, Smith LV, Labbok MH, Geradts J, Bensen JT, Jackson S (2008) Epidemiology of basal-like breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 109(1):123–139

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hankinson S, Hunter D (2002) Breast Cancer. In: Adami HO, Hunter D, Trichopoulos D (eds) Textbook of cancer epidemiology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 301–339

    Google Scholar 

  19. Glynn RJ, Rosner B (2004) Methods to evaluate risks for composite end points and their individual components. J Clin Epidemiol 57(2):113–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Glynn RJ, Rosner B (2005) Comparison of risk factors for the competing risks of coronary heart disease, stroke, and venous thromboembolism. Am J Epidemiol 162(10):975–982

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lunn M, McNeil D (1995) Applying cox regression to competing risks. Biometrics 51(2):524–532

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kwan ML, Kushi LH, Weltzien E, Maring B, Kutner SE, Fulton RS, Lee MM, Ambrosone CB, Caan BJ (2009) Epidemiology of breast cancer subtypes in two prospective cohort studies of breast cancer survivors. Breast Cancer Res 11(3):R31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Phipps AI, Malone KE, Porter PL, Daling JR, Li CI (2008) Reproductive and hormonal risk factors for postmenopausal luminal, HER-2-overexpressing, and triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer 113(7):1521–1526

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gaudet MM, Press MF, Haile RW, Lynch CF, Glaser SL, Schildkraut J, Gammon MD, Douglas Thompson W, Bernstein JL (2011) Risk factors by molecular subtypes of breast cancer across a population-based study of women 56 years or younger. Breast Cancer Res Trea. [Epub ahead of print]

  25. Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, Gao D, Leung S, Snider J, Watson M, Davies S, Bernard PS, Parker JS (2009) Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 101(10):736–750

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank the participants and staff of the Nurses’ Health Study cohort, for their valuable contributions. We thank the following state cancer registries for their help: AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, NE, NH, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA, WA, and WY. The study sponsors had no role in the design of the study; the collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data; the writing of the manuscript; or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Funding/Support

Supported by GlaxoSmithKline (WE234 (EPI40307)); Public Health Service Grants CA087969, and SPORE in Breast Cancer CA089393, from the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services and Breast Cancer Research Fund. Dr. Graham Colditz is supported in part by an American Cancer Society Cissy Hornung Clinical Research Professorship.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rulla M. Tamimi.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 3.

Table 3 Sources and dilutions of primary antibodies used in this study

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tamimi, R.M., Colditz, G.A., Hazra, A. et al. Traditional breast cancer risk factors in relation to molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 131, 159–167 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1702-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1702-0

Keywords

Navigation