Paliagathi Rohith Kumar Reddy¹, Priya Durairaj¹, Thirunavukkarasu Palaniyandi¹, Magesh Ramasamy² and Rajasekar Reddy³

¹Department of Biotechnology, Dr. M. G. R. Educational and Research Institute (University), Maduravoyal, Chennai 600095, Tamil Nadu, India.

²Department of Biotechnology, Faculty of Biomedical Sciences, Sri Ramachandra University, Porur,  Chennai 600116 Tamil Nadu, India.

³Departmen of pathology, Indian Red Cross Scoiety Cancer Hospital, Nellore, Andhra Pradesh- 524004, India.

Corresponding Author E-mail: Rohith6990@gmail.com

DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.13005/bpj/1321

Abstract

Breast Cancer reports are on rise in human. In requirement human is discovering new methods, models and projects which are aimed at better diagnosis, prevention and to avoid it from recurrence. Till date number of technologies are available but early diagnosis of breast cancer still remain a big question. Although number of present technologies indicating and predicting the breast cancer in patients but the sensitivity and specificity still lacking among them. In this review, we reported number of factors which are responsible for breast cancer and on the other hand it also mention the success of machines, drugs and computational biology which in together  will contribute surely to fight against breast cancer if investigated in together.

Keywords

Bioinfo;Breast Cancer; Diagnosis Genes;

Download this article as: 

Copy the following to cite this article: Reddy P. R. K, Durairaj P, Palaniyandi T, Ramasamy M, Reddy R. Essentials and Importance of Breast Cancer. Biomed Pharmacol J 2017;10(4).

Copy the following to cite this URL: Reddy P. R. K, Durairaj P, Palaniyandi T, Ramasamy M, Reddy R. Essentials and Importance of Breast Cancer. Biomed Pharmacol J 2017;10(4). Available from: http://biomedpharmajournal.org/?p=17582

Introduction

Breast cancer is one of the major health problems. The reports of these cases are increasing in most countries and will becontinuing to rise in the next twenty years, despite of number of therapies and guidelines are available (Eccles SA et al., 2013; Arnold M et al., 1988; Rahib L et al., 2014; Colditz GA and Bohlke K, 2014). The incidences of hereditary breast cancer also increased many folds with mutation in breast cancer 2 (BRCA2) gene increased fourfold in Iceland is one of the example. Not only that increased reports of breast cancer by the age 70 has been evidenced which was originally 2.5% and now it is reaching 11% of the total population, in a given time period (Tryggvadottir L et al., 2006). BRCA1 and BRCA2 also related with birth breast cancer incidences also (King MC and Motulsky AG, 2002;Evans DG et al., 2008). The incidences are on rise with number of reasons such as late age of first pregnancy, lower age of menarche, fewer pregnancies, late menopause and even low or no breast feeding. Not only that, several other reasons are also adding up the risk of breast cancer such as hormone therapy, alcohol consumption, obesity, slowness and other factors (Colditz GA and Bohlke K, 2014). All these reports suggest that every individual may be male or female are at a risk of getting breast cancer.

Today’swoman is becoming stronger, independent, economically strong and also she can control the pregnancies with number of aids. Still after pregnancies encouragement for breast feeding is the prime necessity in an order to prevent themselves from breast cancer (Cuzick J et al., 2013). It has been directed by group of researchers called as Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer (2002) that overall incidence of breast cancer shall be reduced by half as estimated current 6.3 to 2.7 per 100 women by the age of 70, if women gave birth to more children and give them breast feeding for longer period as generally observed in developing countries (CGHFBC, 2002).

One success therapy as preventive measure(chemotherapy) is cardiovascular disease (CVD). Thees drugs are capable of suppressing cholesterol synthesis, modifying platelet aggregation that leads to steady drop in CVD incidences. Over past three decades, in the women ageing 85 years old (Jemal A et al., 2007) CVD death ratio reduced optimally by treatment,once it arises; the situation is also applicable to breast cancer treatment also, in which by successful screening and proper treatment death rate has decreased by 33% in last twenty years. This brings about the success of advances in technology and treatment.

About 27% of population in UK reported positive for breast cancer are related toestimated lifestyle and environmental factors in 2010 (Parkin DM et al., 2011) and currently more than half of the breast cancer patientsmay be prevented if proper chemotherapy being given along with maintaining a good lifestyle such as maintaining proper body weight, exercise and minimum alcohol intake (Colditz GA and Bohlke K, 2014). By implementing these strategies incidences of breast cancer may come down in coming time. However, a major lack of knowledge prevails among women about early treatment, diagnosis and guidance.

Models of Risk Evaluation

Two computer models called as BRCAPRO (risk estimator for breast and ovarian cancer) and BOADICEA (the Breast and Ovarian analysis of Disease Incidence and Carrier Estimation Algorithm) have been introduced which scores and helps in predict, whether to perform genetic test or not (Evans DG  et al., 2009; Kast K et al., 2014). Numbers of Bioinformatics approaches have been developed to predict the probability of detecting cancer in patients. For example, possibility of mutation in BRCA1/2 genes, which is linked to small number of women patient with strong family history or to predict the chances of breast cancer over the period of time (Amir E et al., 2010; Meads C, 2012). Applicable to all women, number of models put forward to determine the risk of breast cancer over the period of time (for example, five years or lifetime). The model was put forward the risk prediction based on the number of risk factors woman is carrying (Parkin DM et al., 2011; Amir E et al., 2010; Meads C et al., 2012). These test are known as Cuzick (Tyrer J et al., 2004) and Gail (Gail MH et al., 1989) models, which consider both familial history risk factors and non family factors, BOADICEA (MacInnis RJ et al., 2013), a certain modified Claus model also include non familial risk factor (Evans DG et al., 2014) similar to Rosner-Colditz model (Rosner BA et al., 2013).  Several other models are in process and require some validation and surely all of them may prove even more useful in Breast cancer testing (Meads C et al., 2012).

In a comparative study, existing model showcase several advantages and linked disadvantages which have been tackled by new model algorithms.

Galli based studies are well investigated for regular check up in American women (Costantino JP et al., 1999) and also when using updated breast cancer incidence (Schonfeld SJ et al., 2010). Galli model describes risk factors:- age at menarche, age at first live birth, number of previous breast biopsies, benign disease and number of first degree relatives with breast cancer. However, in recent studies of the UK and US suggest that it may under predict the real risk compared to another Tyrer-Cuzick model (Amir E et al., 2003; Quante AS et al., 2012; Powell M et al., 2014), probablyjust because of limited family factor and by not considering the age of the onset of cancer.

All these models developed to predict the possibility of life time risk towards cancer. Still, these models will not be able to refer by confidence that you are the patient who will get breast cancer. So to fill this gap, number of molecular level techniques have been developed such as mammographic density (Huo CW et al., 2014; Cummings SR et al., 2009), single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) (Michailidou K et al., 2013; Burton H et al., 2013), estimation of hormone level (Hormones E et al., 2011) and lifestyle factors that provides improved accuracy of risk prediction in female population.

Improved Techniques for Risk Estimation

Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms

Only small fraction of women found to be mutated for the high risk breast cancer gene BRCA1/2, whereas variation in other low impact, common susceptible loci are responsible for major Breast Cancer situation (Pharoah PD et al., 2008). Mutation in DNA is recognized by SNPs also, which are alteration in DNA code that are mostly thought to be non functional genes. Hence relatively, SNPs are less harmful with maximum risk is about 1.43 fold and mostly have the effect of 1.1 fold. In a collaborative work, more than nine thousand breast cancer sequence reports were studied on large scale compared to control. Study on such a large scale is required to understand the effect of every SNPs with their associated risk factor. However, in combination of allele weighted by the comparative risk associated with every allele, combined SNPs may be related with substantial increases or decreases in risk factor. Till date, breast cancer marker SNPs are reported to be seventy, but it is considered that may be some hundreds of those must be present to bring about breast cancer (Michailidou K et al., 2013). Instead of using SNPs information alone, they have been added up with Gail model and results showcased interestingly high AUC score shift from 0.58 to 0.61 (P=0.001) (Mealiffe ME et al., 2010). As per Wacholder and colleagues (Wacholder S et al., 2010) by using 10 SNPs data increase in AUC from 0.58 to 0.62 was reported (Gail MH, 2009) and Gail et al predicted an increase in C-statistics from 0.61 to 0.63. In recent work Dite and workers (Dite GS etal., 2013) studied seven SNPs and recorded an increase in AUC from 0.58 to 0.61 (P<0.001).

In many works value added features of SNPs to risk model has been assessed the changes in risk group stratification as before and after addition of SNPs. For example, reclassifying the women truly at high or low risk would be clinically important. All the studies referred above showcase that changes in risk classification at higher and lower part resulting in a ‘widening’ of the risk distribution curves as suggested by researchers. For example, Comen and colleagues (Comen E et al., 2011), with the combination of 10 risk SNPs and the Gail model, 20% of women being reclassified into lower and similarly, 20% into a high risk group as proposed by quintiles. In recent work, Brentnall and colleagues (Brentnall AR et al., 2014) and Evans and colleagues (Evans DG et al., 2012) understood the effect of risk of combining 18or 67 SNPs with Tyrer-Cuzick model. They found that adding moreSNPs changes the risk distribution in the manner so that they were in high and low risk groups respectively.

All above studies depicted that potential of SNPs for improved risk prediction in high risk clinics and in general use is showcasing their potent features. Hence, better detection rate could be possible by involving SNPs and it can even detect breast cancer subtypes, such as ER⁺ (Stacey SN et al., 2008), ER^– (Garcia-Closas M et al., 2013), grade III (Purrington KS et al., 2014) and triple negative (Purrington KS et al., 2014) tumors and probably be useful in preventive approaches (Garcia-Closas M et al., 2014).

Mammographic Density

Use of mammographic density in the breast cancer has been reviewed in recent times (Huo CW et al., 2014; Cummings SR et al., 2009). As per Mammogram, dense tissue is always white, whereas fat tissue is radio-lucent and appears black. As per one research, relative risk of breast cancer for women with 70% or more density was 4.64 fold higher compared to women with less than 5% density (McCormack VA and dos Santos SI, 2006).

Many reports have already scored whether adding a measure of mammographic density improves risk estimation when compared to estimation using standard model alone. Where standard measure of improvement of risk assessment is called C-statistics. Here this study comes under receiver operative curve (AUC), which in turn is a reflection of the available sensitivity and obvious specificity of the model. As reported, high C-statistics (AUC), the greater is the accuracy of the model. So in scoring AUC with 0.5 identifies a model which detecting accuracy is not over scored than chance alone; score of AUC as 1.0 identifies a model with highest discrimination. In general, AUC of 0.7 or 0.8 are more consistent and recorded as good discriminatory accuracy (Amir E et al., 2010).

In two examples such as use of BI-RADS assessed density to the Gail model, C-statistics of Gail model is previously 0.67, but by adding density to Gail model it has increased to 0.68, even though the small rise in discriminatory accuracy but found to be significant (P<0.01). Barlow and colleagues also reported the increase of C-statistics which was 0.605 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.60 to 0.61) to 0.62 (95% CI 0.62 to 0.63) by adding BI-RADS density to Gail method (Barlow WE et al., 2006).

Chemoprevention- A Battle

As per number of clinical trials and use by the breast cancer positive patients, drug tamoxifen 20mg/day reducing about 38% of cancer (P<0.0001) (Cuzick J et al., 2013) with an estimated 10 years of reduction cumulative incidence. Tamoxifen was significantly superior to Raloxifene in long term use for preventing invasive breast cancer. Never the less, raloxifene also produce fewer side effects than tamoxifen, particularly in uterus and may be preferable in post-menopausal women.

In comparison, AIs are generally proved superior for treatment when especially given after surgery to prevent relapse of breast cancer. One worker reported AI exemestane when tested, a reduction in breast cancer risk of 65% for 5 years of treatment has been evidenced (Goss PE et al., 2011).

Living Pattern

It has been reported that 40% menopausal breast cancer cases could be prevented by reduction in alcohol intake, excess body weight and increasing inactivity (WCRFI http://www.wcrf.org/). Along with, these many reports mentioned earlier (Colditz GA and Bohlke K, 2014; Parkin DM et al., 2011) always indicated the importance of lifestyle that human is living and needs to change as per health requirement for better lifespan.

Hormonal Changes

Hormone based analysis with long term follow up showcase that hormones and growth factors are responsible for increasing risk of breast cancer. The most important question arises whether they could be incorporated into model of breast cancer risk prediction. Many groups reported that risk of breast cancer was associated with the hormonal steroid namely testesterone, estradiol and sex hormones-binding globulin in pre- and post- menopause women and related that these are important hormone for further investigation (Key TJ et al., 2003; Hormones E  et al., 2013; James RE  et al., 2011; Kaaks R  et al. 2014). Very interesting finding is that, the relation of Body Mass Index (BMI) with risk is reduced by adjusting for estrogen, but the relation of estrogen with risk is not controlled by BMI. Thus estrogen may put forward the increased risk of breast cancer in obese post-menopausal women, although number of other hormones and cytokines also affect the process (Key TJ et al., 2003; Ritte R et al., 2012).

Use of hormone measurement in breast cancer could be a better attraction. However, its measurement probably in post-menopausal women is not feasible for many instance, as it show assay variation based on low level of hormone over time (Jones ME et al., 2014). Interestingly, Jones and colleagues related change in estradiol and testesterone must be a good biomarker for the promising weight loss and it supported by recent data of many research (Jones ME et al., 2013; Tworoger SS et al., 2014). Additionally, insulin like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) is also associated with cancer risk, particularly post-menopausal women and may possibly be utilized in model study (EHBCCG, 2010; Tworoger SSet al., 2013; Tikk Ket al., 2014; Kaaks Ret al., 2014).

Detection of Risk by Recent Methods

As every day new protein is getting discovered, chances of them to be a biomarker in risk evaluation is promising but, it is always a long and tedious process which involves validation to make any protein a marker. At present,number of new techniques are coming and for sure few of them will become the part of standard model. For example, gene expression in peripheral blood white cells (Sharma P et al., 2005), blood epigenetic markers (Almouzni G et al., 2014), functional proteomics (Anderson KS et al., 2011), and epithelial antigen (Macdonald IK et al., 2012). All these methods proving their potential and surely in coming time may be the part of standard model.

Exercise and Physical Work

Many countries like US have published a report that their >50% population do not meet the recommendation of PA guidelines. In addition, countries like England reported that 40% of adult women (minimum 19 years) do not perform physical activity for necessary 150 minutes-75 minutes per week and increasing their chances of breast cancer (HSCIChttp://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB13218; Hastert TA et al., 2013). It has been reported that moderate to rigorous PA decreases breast cancer risk by 25% in both pre- and post-menopausal women compared with inactive women (Lynch BM et al., 2011).

How to Prevent Breast Cancer

How women can prevent to be get affected by Breast Cancer? Many reviews were highlighting prevention aspects including SERMs and AIs for the chemoprevention of ER⁺ cancers (Advani P and Moreno-Aspitia A, 2014; Chlebowski RT, 2014), chemoprevention for ER^–cancers (den Hollander P et al., 2012; Steward WP and Brown K, 2013) and changes in the lifestyle (Colditz GA and Bohlke K, 2014; Colditz GA et al., 2014; Harvie M and Howell A, 2012). All these reviews pointing number of potentially useful areas and further investigation is required.

Food and Weight Control

Number of reports highlighted that weight gain in the pre-menopausal period and to put weight after menopause always increases chances of cancer incidents (Colditz GA and Bohlke K, 2014; Renehan AG et al., 2008). Worker estimated that for human 5 kg/m² increase in BMI increases the risk of breast cancer to about 12%. It is also been evidenced that pre- and post-menopausal weight loss minimizes the incidences of post-menopausal breast cancer. In Iowa, with the weight reduction of 5% of body weight has been related to reduce the cancer risk by 25% to 40% compared to woman keep on gaining body weight (Harvie M et al., 2005). In another study, post-menopausal women when did not take HRT and also maintain a body weight, by reducing 10 kg or more do have 50% reduction in the risk of breast cancer (Eliassen AH et al., 2006). It is also suggested that weight reduction after the age of 36 is also preferential to avoid breast cancer (Cecchini RS et al., 2012).

Food and Cancer Prevention

Food with important content such as protein, carbohydrates, lipids and nucleic acids are always an important factor to be considered for better health. According to, WHI reduction in fat in diet also reduces the chances of risk of breast cancer but showed non-significant relation statistically (Prentice RL et al., 2006). Patients with breast cancer surgery advised to take low fat diet which reduces 23% of risk of recurrence (Chlebowski RT et al., 2006). No significant reduction in risk of breast cancer was recorded even if vegetable and fruit intake has increased in an adjuvant trial (Pierce JP et al., 2007). Increased carotenoid improves the health and reduces the chances of ER^– but not with the risk of ER⁺disease, but still need investigation (Jung S et al., 2013; Eliassen AH et al., 2012). Increase intake of vegetables was associated with a 15% reduction in breast cancer risk (85% of CI 0.76 to 0.95). In one report consumption of fruits, vegetables, fish and soy are associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer (Albuquerque RC et al., 2014; Ferrari P et al., 2013).

Beverages with Alcohol

As it is clearly known that intake of alcohol in a high concentration/amount always leads to ill effect in human. Here leads to ill effect in human. Here the chances of getting breast cancer increases by 7 to 10% with every one unit consumption of alcohol per day. In one study, women consuming 4 to 9 units per week also have about 15% of increased chances to develop breast cancer compared to non-drinkers (Chen WY et al., 2011). Whereas, woman with heavy alcohol intake (27 units per week) were at the risk of 51% for breast cancer compared to non-drinkers. Overall, it has been suggested that woman should not prefer to take more than one unit per day and in a week at least two days should remain devoid of alcohol intake to be get avoided by the risk of breast cancer (Zhang SM et al., 2005). To live better life, moderate alcohol intake compared to none is preferable (Ferrari P et al., 2014). As per research, women with alcoholic influence have more chances of getting carcinogenesis in the period of menarche and first pregnancy (Pike MC et al., 1983; Colditz GA and Frazier AL, 1995).

Conclusion

Review of literature published till date informed us that Breast cancer is preventable by bringing the changes in human activity such as exercise, breast feeding, proper life style which is prerequisite. Once affected proper chemotherapy at early stage surely can minimize the chances of death and afterwards proper food and lifestyle is prerequisite to avoid any recurrence.

In second point number of technologies have developed and many more are coming which will surely benefit to check the probability and prevention of cancer in women. Women needs to be educated and informed by number of resources to check back the early detection of Breast Cancer and even more important what could be done to avoid getting Breast Cancer. It always remains a thrust area of research which could be fasten up by Bioinformatics research giving the complete gene expression, mutation and proteome information at a very fast speed which was not feasible a decade ago.

Acknowledgement

Declared None

Conflict of Interests

Declared None

References

1. Advani P, Moreno-Aspitia A. Current strategies for the prevention of breast cancer. Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press). 2014;6:59–71.
2. Albuquerque R.C, Baltar V.T, Marchioni D.M. Breast cancer and dietary patterns: a systematic review. Nutr Rev. 2014;72:1–17.
   CrossRef
3. Almouzni G, Altucci L, Amati B, Ashley N, Baulcombe D, Beaujean N, Bock C, Bongcam-Rudloff E, Bousquet J, Braun S, Paillerets B.B, Bussemakers M, Clarke L, Conesa A, Estivill X, Fazeli A, Grgurević N, Gut I, Heijmans B.T, Hermouet S, Houwing-Duistermaat J, Iacobucci I, Ilaš J, Kandimalla R, Krauss-Etschmann S, Lasko P, Lehmann S, Lindroth A, Majdič G, Marcotte E, et al: Relationship between genome and epigenome – challenges and requirements for future research. BMC Genomics. 2014;15:487.
   CrossRef
4. Amir E, Evans D.G, Shenton A, Lalloo F, Moran A, Boggis C, Wilson M, Howell A. Evaluation of breast cancer risk assessment packages in the family history evaluation and screening programme. J. Med Genet. 2003;40:807–814.
   CrossRef
5. Amir E, Freedman O.C, Seruga B, Evans D.G.  Assessing women at high risk of breast cancer: a review of risk assessment models. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:680–691.
   CrossRef
6. Anderson K.S, Sibani S, Wallstrom G, Qiu J, Mendoza E.A, Raphael J, Hainsworth E, Montor W.R, Wong J, Park J.G, Lokko N, Logvinenko T, Ramachandran N, Godwin A.K, Marks J, Engstrom P, Labaer J.  Protein microarray signature of autoantibody biomarkers for the early detection of breast cancer. J. Proteome Res. 2011;10:85–96.
   CrossRef
7. Arnold M, Karim-Kos H.E, Coebergh J.W, Byrnes G, Antilla A, Ferlay J, Renehan A.G, Forman D, Soerjomataram I. Recent trends in incidence of five common cancers in 26 European countries since 1988: Analysis of the European Cancer Observatory. Eur .J. Cancer. 2013.
8. Barlow W.E, White E, Ballard-Barbash R, Vacek P.M, Titus-Ernstoff L, Carney P.A, Tice J.A, Buist D.S, Geller B.M, Rosenberg R, Yankaskas B.C, Kerlikowske K.  Prospective breast cancer risk prediction model for women undergoing screening mammography. J. Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1204–1214.
   CrossRef
9. Brentnall A.R, Evans D.G, Cuzick J. Distribution of breast cancer risk from SNPs and classical risk factors in women of routine screening age in the UK. Br .J. Cancer. 2014;110:827–828.
   CrossRef
10. Burton H, Chowdhury S, Dent T, Hall A, Pashayan N, Pharoah P.  Public health implications from COGS and potential for risk stratification and screening. Nat Genet. 2013;45:349–351.
    CrossRef
11. Cecchini R.S, Costantino J.P, Cauley J.A, Cronin W.M, Wickerham D.L, Land S.R, Weissfeld J.L, Wolmark N.  Body mass index and the risk for developing invasive breast cancer among high-risk women in NSABP P-1 and STAR breast cancer prevention trials. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2012;5:583–592.
    CrossRef
12. CGHFBC: Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer: Breast cancer and breastfeeding: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 47 epidemiological studies in 30 countries, including 50302 women with breast cancer and 96973 women without the disease. Lancet.  2002;360:187–195.
    CrossRef
13. Chen W.Y, Rosner B, Hankinson S.E, Colditz G.A, Willett W.C. Moderate alcohol consumption during adult life, drinking patterns, and breast cancer risk. JAMA. 2011;306:1884–1890.
    CrossRef
14. Chlebowski R.T, Blackburn G.L, Thomson C.A, Nixon D.W, Shapiro A, Hoy M.K, Goodman M.T, Giuliano A.E, Karanja N, McAndrew P, Hudis C, Butler J, Merkel D, Kristal A, Caan B, Michaelson R, Vinciguerra V, Prete D.S, Winkler M, Hall R, Simon M, Winters B.L, Elashoff R.M. Dietary fat reduction and breastcancer outcome: interim efficacy results from the Women’s Intervention Nutrition Study. J. Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1767–1776.
    CrossRef
15. Chlebowski R.T. Current concepts in breast cancer chemoprevention. Pol Arch Med Wewn. 2014;124:191–199.
    CrossRef
16. Colditz G.A, Bohlke K, Berkey C.S.  Breast cancer risk accumulation starts early: prevention must also. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;145:567–579.
    CrossRef
17. Colditz G.A, Bohlke K. Priorities for the primary prevention of breast cancer. CA Cancer .J. Clin. 2014;64:186–194.
    CrossRef
18. Colditz G.A, Frazier A.L.  Models of breast cancer show that risk is set by events of early life: prevention efforts must shift focus. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1995;4:567–571.
19. Comen E, Balistreri L, Gönen M, Dutra-Clarke A, Fazio M, Vijai J, Stadler Z, Kauff N, Kirchhoff T, Hudis C, Offit K, Robson M. Discriminatory accuracy and potential clinical utility of genomic profiling for breast cancer risk in BRCA-negative women. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;127:479–487.
    CrossRef
20. Costantino J.P, Gail M.H, Pee D, Anderson S, Redmond C.K, Benichou J, Wieand H.S. Validation studies for models projecting the risk of invasive and total breast cancer incidence. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:1541–1548.
    CrossRef
21. Cummings S.R, Tice J.A, Bauer S, Browner W.S, Cuzick J, Ziv E, Vogel V, Shepherd J, Vachon C, Smith-Bindman R, Kerlikowske K. Prevention of breast cancer in post-menopausal women: approaches to estimating and reducing risk. J. Natl Cancer Inst.  2009;101:384–398.
    CrossRef
22. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Bonanni B, Costantino J.P, Cummings S, DeCensi A, Dowsett M, Forbes J.F, Ford L, LaCroix A.Z, Mershon J, Mitlak B.H, Powles T, Veronesi U, Vogel V, Wickerham D.L.  SERM Chemoprevention of Breast Cancer Overview Group: Selective oestrogen receptor modulators in prevention of breast cancer: an updated meta-analysis of individualparticipant data. Lancet. 2013;381:1827–1834.
    CrossRef
23. den Hollander P, Savage M.I, Brown P.H.  Targeted therapy for breast cancer prevention. Front Oncol. 2013;3:250.
    CrossRef
24. Dite G.S, Mahmoodi M, Bickerstaffe A, Hammet F, Macinnis R.J, Tsimiklis H, Dowty J.G, Apicella C, Phillips K.A, Giles G.G, Southey M.C, Hopper J.L.  Using SNP genotypes to improve the discrimination of a simple breast cancer risk prediction model. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013;139:887–896.
    CrossRef
25. Eccles S.A, Aboagye E.O, Ali S, Anderson A.S, Armes J, Berditchevski F, Blaydes J.P, Brennan K, Brown N.J, Bryant H.E, Bundred N.J, Burchell J.M, Campbell A.M, Carroll J.S, Clarke R.B, Coles C.E, Cook G.J, Cox A, Curtin N.J, Dekker L.V, SilvaIdos S, Duffy S.W, Easton D.F, Eccles D.M, Edwards D.R, Edwards J, Evans D, Fenlon D.F, Flanagan J.M. Critical research gaps and translational priorities for the successful prevention and treatment of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2013;15:92.
    CrossRef
26. EHBCCG.  Endogenous Hormones, Breast Cancer Collaborative Group: Insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1), IGF binding protein 3 (IGFBP3), and breast cancer risk: pooled individual data analysis of 17 prospective studies. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:530–542.
    CrossRef
27. Eliassen A.H, Colditz G.A, Rosner B, Willett W.C, Hankinson S.E.  Adult mweight change and risk of post-menopausal breast cancer. JAMA 2006;296:193–201.
    CrossRef
28. Eliassen A.H, Hendrickson S.J, Brinton L.A, Buring J.E, Campos H, Dai Q, Dorgan J.F, Franke A.A, Gao Y.T, Goodman M.T, Hallmans G, Helzlsouer K.J, Hoffman-Bolton J, Hultén K, Sesso H.D, Sowell A.L, Tamimi R.M, Toniolo P, Wilkens L.R, Winkvist A, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A, Zheng W, Hankinson S.E.  Circulating carotenoids and risk of breast cancer: pooled analysis ofeight prospective studies. J. Natl Cancer Inst 2012;104:1905–1916.
    CrossRef
29. Evans D.G, Ingham S, Dawe S, Roberts L, Lalloo F, Brentnall A.R, Stavrinos P, Howell A.  Breast cancer risk assessment in 8,824 women attending a family history evaluation and screening programme. Fam Cancer. 2014;13:189–196.
    CrossRef
30. Evans D.G, Lalloo F, Cramer A, Jones E.A, Knox F, Amir E, Howell A. Addition of pathology and biomarker information significantly improves the performance of the Manchester scoring system for BRCA1 and BRCA2 testing. J. Med Genet. 2009;46:811–817.
    CrossRef
31. Evans D.G, Shenton A, Woodward E, Lalloo F, Howell A, Maher E.R. Penetrance estimates for BRCA1 and BRCA2 based on genetic testing in a Clinical Cancer Genetics service setting: risks of breast/ovarian cancer quoted should reflect the cancer burden in the family. BMC Cancer 2008;8:155.
    CrossRef
32. Evans D.G, Warwick J, Astley S.M, Stavrinos P, Sahin S, Ingham S, McBurney H, Eckersley B, Harvie M, Wilson M, Beetles U, Warren R, Hufton A, Sergeant J.C, Newman W.G, Buchan I, Cuzick J, Howell A. Assessing individual breast cancer risk within the U.K. National Health Service Breast Screening Program: a new paradigm for cancer prevention. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2012;5:943–951.
    CrossRef
33. Ferrari P, Licaj I, Muller D.C, Kragh Andersen P, Johansson M, Boeing H, Weiderpass E, Dossus L, Dartois L, Fagherazzi G, Bradbury K.E, Khaw K.T, Wareham N, Duell E.J, Barricarte A, Molina-Montes E, Sanchez C.N, Arriola L, Wallström P, Tjønneland A, Olsen A, Trichopoulou A, Benetou V, Trichopoulos D, Tumino R, Agnoli C, Sacerdote C, Palli D, Li K, Kaaks R, et al.  Lifetime alcohol use and overall and cause-specific mortality in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and nutrition (EPIC) study. BMJ Open. 2014;4:e005245.
    CrossRef
34. Ferrari P, Rinaldi S, Jenab M, Lukanova A, Olsen A, Tjønneland A, Overvad K, Clavel-Chapelon F, Fagherazzi G, Touillaud M, Kaaks R, von Rüsten A, Boeing H, Trichopoulou A, Lagiou P, Benetou V, Grioni S, Panico S, Masala G, Tumino R, Polidoro S, Bakker M.F, van Gils C.H, Ros M.M, Bueno-de-Mesquita H.B, Krum-Hansen S, Engeset D, Skeie G, Pilar A, Sánchez M.J, et al. Dietary fiber intake and risk of hormonal receptor-defined breast cancer in theEuropean Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study.Am .J. Clin Nutr. 2013;97:344–353.
    CrossRef
35. Gail M.H, Brinton L.A, Byar D.P, Corle D.K, Green S.B, Schairer C, Mulvihill J.J.  Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 1989;81:1879–1886.
    CrossRef
36. Gail M.H. Value of adding single-nucleotide polymorphism genotypes to a breast cancer risk model. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:959–963.
    CrossRef
37. Garcia-Closas M, Burak Gunsoy N, Chatterjee N.  Combined effects of genetic and environmental risk factors: implications for prevention of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. in press.J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 Nov 12;106(11).
    CrossRef
38. Garcia-Closas M, Couch F.J, Lindstrom S, Michailidou K, Schmidt M.K, Brook M.N, Orr N, Rhie S.K, Riboli E, Feigelson H.S, Le Marchand L, Buring J.E, Eccles D, Miron P, Fasching P.A, Brauch H, Chang-Claude J, Carpenter J, Godwin A.K, Nevanlinna H, Giles G.G, Cox A, Hopper J.L, Bolla M.K, Wang Q, Dennis J, Dicks E, Howat W.J, Schoof N, Bojesen S.E, et al. Genome-wide association studies identify four ER negative-specific breast cancer risk loci. Nat Genet. 2013;45:392–398.
    CrossRef
39. Goss P.E, Ingle J.N, Ales-Martinez J.E, Cheung A.M, Chlebowski R.T, Wactawski-Wende J, McTiernan A, Robbins J, Johnson K.C, Martin L.W, Winquist E, Sarto G.E, Garber J.E, Fabian C.J, Pujol P, Maunsell E, Farmer P, Gelmon K.A, Tu D, Richardson H, NCIC CTG MAP.3 Study Investigators: Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in post-menopausal women. N Engl .J. Med. 2011;64:2381–2391.
    CrossRef
40. Harvie M, Howell A, Vierkant RA, Kumar N, Cerhan J.R, Kelemen L.E, Folsom A.R, Sellers T.A.  Association of gain and loss of weight before and after menopause with risk of post-menopausal breast cancer in the Iowa women’s health study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:656–661.
    CrossRef
41. Harvie M, Howell A.  Energy restriction and the prevention of breast cancer. Proc Nutr Soc. 2012;71:263–275.
    CrossRef
42. Hastert T.A, Beresford S.A, Patterson R.E, Kristal AR, White E. Adherence to WCRF/AICR cancer prevention recommendations and risk of post-menopausal breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2013;22:1498–1508.
    CrossRef
43. Hormones E, Group BCC, Key T.J, Appleby P.N, Reeves G.K, Roddam A.W, Helzlsouer K.J, Alberg A.J, Rollison D.E, Dorgan J.F, Brinton L.A, Overvad K, Kaaks R, Trichopoulou A, Clavel-Chapelon F, Panico S, Duell E.J, Peeters P.H, Rinaldi S, Fentiman I.S, Dowsett M, Manjer J, Lenner P, Hallmans G, Baglietto L, English D.R, Giles G.G, Hopper J.L, Severi G, Morris H.A, et al.  Circulating sex hormones and breast cancer risk factors in post-menopausal women: reanalysis of 13 studies. Br .J. Cancer. 2011;105:709–722.
    CrossRef
44. Hormones E, Group B.C.C, Key T.J, Appleby P.N, Reeves G.K, Travis R.C, Alberg A.J, Barricarte A, Berrino F, Krogh V, Sieri S, Brinton L.A, Dorgan J.F, Dossus L, Dowsett M, Eliassen A.H, Fortner R.T, Hankinson S.E, Helzlsouer K.J, Hoffman-Bolton J, Comstock G.W, Kaaks R, Kahle L.L, Muti P, Overvad K, Peeters P.H, Riboli E, Rinaldi S, Rollison D.E, Stanczyk F.Z, et al.  Sex hormones and risk of breast cancer in premenopausal women: a collaborative reanalysis of individual participant data from seven prospective studies. Lancet Oncol 2013;14:1009–1019.
    CrossRef
45. HSCIC. Health and Social Care Information Centre: Health Survey for England. 2102. http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB 13218.
46. Huo C.W, Chew G.L, Britt K.L, Ingman W.V, Henderson M.A, Hopper J.L, Thompson E.W.  Mammographic density-a review on the current understanding of its association with breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;144:479–502.
    CrossRef
47. James R.E, Lukanova A, Dossus L, Becker S, Rinaldi S, Tjønneland A, Olsen A, Overvad K, Mesrine S, Engel P, Clavel-Chapelon F, Chang-Claude J, Vrieling A, Boeing H, Schütze M, Trichopoulou A, Lagiou P, Trichopoulos D, Palli D, Krogh V, Panico S, Tumino R, Sacerdote C, Rodríguez L, Buckland G, Sánchez MJ, Amiano P, Ardanaz E, Bueno-de-Mesquita B, Ros M.M, et al.  Post-menopausal serum sex steroids and risk of hormone receptor-positive and –negative breast cancer: a nested case–control study. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2011;4:1626–1635.
    CrossRef
48. Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Thun M.J. Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer .J. Clin. 2007;57:43–66.
    CrossRef
49. Jones M.E, Schoemaker M, Rae M, Folkerd E.J, Dowsett M, Ashworth A, Swerdlow A.J. Changes in estradiol and testosterone levels in post-menopausal women after changes in body mass index. J. Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98:2967–2974.
    CrossRef
50. Jones M.E, Schoemaker M.J, Rae M, Folkerd E.J, Dowsett M, Ashworth A, Swerdlow A.J.  Reproducibility of estradiol and testosterone levels inpost-menopausal women over 5 years: results from the Breakthrough Generations Study. Am .J. Epidemiol. 2014;179:1128–1133.
    CrossRef
51. Jung S, Spiegelman D, Baglietto L, Bernstein L, Boggs D.A, van den Brandt P.A, Buring J.E, Cerhan J.R, Gaudet M.M, Giles G.G, Goodman G, Hakansson N, Hankinson S.E, Helzlsouer K, Horn-Ross P.L, Inoue M, Krogh V, Lof M, McCullough M.L, Miller A.B, Neuhouser M.L, Palmer J.R, Park Y, Robien K, Rohan T.E, Scarmo S, Schairer C, Schouten L.J, Shikany J.M, Sieri S, et al. Fruit and vegetable intake and risk of breast cancer by hormone receptor status. J. Natl Cancer Inst 2013;105:219–236.
    CrossRef
52. Kaaks R, Johnson T, Tikk K, Sookthai D, Tjønneland A, Roswall N, Overvad K, Clavel-Chapelon F, Boutron-Ruault M.C, Dossus L, Rinaldi S, Romieu I, Boeing H, Schütze M, Trichopoulou A, Lagiou P, Trichopoulos D, Palli D, Grioni S, Tumino R, Sacerdote C, Panico S, Buckland G, Argüelles M, Sánchez M.J, Amiano P, Chirlaque M.D, Ardanaz E, Bueno-de-Mesquita H.B, Gils v.C.H, et al. Insulin-like growth factor I and risk of breast cancer by age and hormone receptor status – a prospective study within the EPIC cohort. Int .J. Cancer. 2014;134:2683–2690.
    CrossRef
53. Kaaks R, Tikk K, Sookthai D, Schock H, Johnson T, Tjønneland A, Olsen A, Overvad K, Clavel-Chapelon F, Dossus L, Baglietto L, Rinaldi S, Chajes V, Romieu I, Boeing H, Schütze M, Trichopoulou A, Lagiou P, Trichopoulos D, Palli D, Sieri S, Tumino R, Ricceri F, Mattiello A, Buckland G, Ramón Quirós J, Sánchez M.J, Amiano P, Chirlaque M.D, Barricarte A, et al: Premenopausal serum sex hormone levels in relation to breast cancer risk, overall and by hormone receptor status – results from the EPIC cohort. Int .J. Cancer. 2014;134:1947–1957.
    CrossRef
54. Kast K, Schmutzler R.K, Rhiem K, Kiechle M, Fischer C, Niederacher D, Arnold N, Grimm T, Speiser D, Schlegelberger B, Varga D, Horvath J, Beer M, Briest S, Meindl A, Engel C.  Validation of the Manchester scoring system for predicting BRCA1/2 mutations in 9,390 families suspected of having hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Int .J. Cancer. 2014 Nov 15;135(10):2352-61.
    CrossRef
55. Key T.J, Appleby P.N, Reeves G.K, Roddam A, Dorgan J.F, Longcope C, Stanczyk F.Z, Stephenson H.E Jr, Falk R.T, Miller R, Schatzkin A, Allen D.S, Fentiman I.S, Key T.J, Wang D.Y, Dowsett M, Thomas H.V, Hankinson S.E, Toniolo P, Akhmedkhanov A, Koenig K, Shore R.E, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A, Berrino F, Muti P, Micheli A, Krogh V, Sieri S, Pala V, et al.  Body mass index, serum sex hormones, and breast cancer risk in post-menopausal women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003;95:1218–1226.
    CrossRef
56. King M.C, Motulsky A.G.  Human genetics. Mapping human history. Science. 2002;298:2342–2343.
    CrossRef
57. Lynch B.M, Neilson H.K, Friedenreich C.M.  Physical activity and breast cancer prevention. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2011;186:13–42.
    CrossRef
58. Macdonald I.K, Allen J, Murray A, Parsy-Kowalska C.B, Healey G.F, Chapman C.J, Sewell H.F, Robertson J.F.  Development and validation of a high throughput system for discovery of antigens for autoantibody detection. PLoS One. 2012;7:e40759.
    CrossRef
59. MacInnis R.J, Bickerstaffe A, Apicella C, Dite G.S, Dowty J.G, Aujard K, Phillips K.A, Weideman P, Lee A, Terry M.B, Giles G.G, Southey M.C, Antoniou A.C, Hopper J.L.  Prospective validation of the breast cancer risk predictionmodel BOADICEA and a batch-mode version BOADICEACentre. Br .J. Cancer. 2013;109:1296–1301.
    CrossRef
60. McCormack V.A, dos Santos S.I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006;15:1159–1169.
    CrossRef
61. Meads C, Ahmed I, Riley R.D.  A systematic review of breast cancer incidence risk prediction models with meta-analysis of their performance. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;132:365–377.
    CrossRef
62. Meads C, Ahmed I, Riley R.D. A systematic review of breast cancer incidence risk prediction models with meta-analysis of their performance. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;132:365–377.
    CrossRef
63. Mealiffe M.E, Stokowski R.P, Rhees B.K, Prentice R.L, Pettinger M, Hinds D.A.  Assessment of clinical validity of a breast cancer risk model combining genetic and clinical information. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102:1618–1627.
    CrossRef
64. Michailidou K, Hall P, Gonzalez-Neira A, Ghoussaini M, Dennis J, Milne R.L, Schmidt M.K, Chang-Claude J, Bojesen S.E, Bolla M.K, Wang Q, Dicks E, Lee A, Turnbull C, Breast and Ovarian Cancer Susceptibility Collaboration, Rahman N, Fletcher O, Peto J, Gibson L, Dos Santos Silva I, Nevanlinna H, Muranen T.A, Aittomäki K, Blomqvist C, Czene K, Irwanto A, Liu J, Waisfisz Q, Meijers-Heijboer H, Adank M. Large-scale genotyping identifies 41 new loci associated with breast cancer risk. Nat Genet. 2013;45:353–361.
    CrossRef
65. Parkin D.M, Boyd L, Walker L.C. The fraction of cancer attributable to lifestyle and environmental factors in the UK in 2010. Br .J. Cancer. 2011;105:S77–S81.
    CrossRef
66. Pharoah P.D, Antoniou A.C, Easton D.F, Ponder B.A.  Polygenes, risk prediction, and targeted prevention of breast cancer. N Engl .J. Med. 2008;358:2796–2803.
    CrossRef
67. Pierce J.P, Natarajan L, Caan B.J, Parker B.A, Greenberg E.R, Flatt S.W, Rock C.L, Kealey S, Al-Delaimy W.K, Bardwell W.A, Carlson R.W, Emond J.A, Faerber S, Gold E.B, Hajek R.A, Hollenbach K, Jones L.A, Karanja N, Madlensky L, Marshall J, Newman V.A, Ritenbaugh C, Thomson C.A, Wasserman L, Stefanick M.L.  Influence of a diet very high in vegetables, fruit, and fiber and low in fat on prognosis following treatment for breast cancer: the Women’s Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL) randomized trial. JAMA. 2007;298:289–298.
    CrossRef
68. Pike M.C, Krailo M.D, Henderson B.E, Casagrande J.T, Hoel D.G. ‘Hormonal’ risk factors, ‘breast tissue age’ and the age-incidence of breast cancer. Nature. 1983;303:767–770.
    CrossRef
69. Powell M, Jamshidian F, Cheyne K, Nititham J, Prebil L.A, Ereman R. Assessing breast cancer risk models in Marin County, a population with high rates of delayed childbirth. Clin Breast Cancer. 2014;14:212–220.
    CrossRef
70. Prentice R.L, Caan B, Chlebowski R.T, Patterson R, Kuller L.H, Ockene J.K, Margolis K.L, Limacher M.C, Manson J.E, Parker L.M, Paskett E, Phillips L, Robbins J, Rossouw J.E, Sarto G.E, Shikany J.M, Stefanick M.L, Thomson C.A, Horn V .L, Vitolins M.Z, Wactawski-Wende J, Wallace R.B, Wassertheil-Smoller S, Whitlock E, Yano K, Adams-Campbell L, Anderson G.L, Assaf A.R, Beresford S.A, Black H.R, et al. Low-fat dietary pattern and risk of invasive breast cancer: the Women’s Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial. JAMA. 2006;295:629–642.
    CrossRef
71. Purrington K.S, Slager S, Eccles D, Yannoukakos D, Fasching P.A, Miron P, Carpenter J, Chang-Claude J, Martin N.G, Montgomery G.W, Kristensen V, Anton-Culver H, Goodfellow P, Tapper W.J, Rafiq S, Gerty S.M, Durcan L, Konstantopoulou I, Fostira F, Vratimos A, Apostolou P, Konstanta I, Kotoula V, Lakis S, Dimopoulos M.A, Skarlos D, Pectasides D, Fountzilas G, Beckmann M.W, Hein A, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies 25 known breast cancer susceptibility loci as risk factors for triple-negative breast cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2014; 35:1012–1019.
    CrossRef
72. Purrington K.S, Slettedahl S, Bolla M.K, Michailidou K, Czene K, Nevanlinna H, Bojesen S.E, Andrulis I.L, Cox A, Hall P, Carpenter J, Yannoukakos D, Haiman C.A, Fasching P.A, Mannermaa A, Winqvist R, Brenner H, Lindblom A, Chenevix-Trench G, Benitez J, Swerdlow A, Kristensen V, Guénel P, Meindl A, Darabi H, Eriksson M, Fagerholm R, Aittomäki K, Blomqvist C, Nordestgaard B.G, et al. Genetic variation in mitotic regulatory pathway genes is associated with breast tumor grade. Hum Mol Genet. 2014 Nov 15;23(22):6034-46.
    CrossRef
73. Quante A.S, Whittemore A.S, Shriver T, Strauch K, Terry M.B. Breast cancer risk assessment across the risk continuum: genetic and nongenetic risk factors contributing to differential model performance. Breast Cancer Res. 2012;14:R144.
    CrossRef
74. Rahib L, Smith B.D, Aizenberg R, Rosenzweig A.B, Fleshman J.M, Matrisian L.M. Projecting cancer incidence and deaths to 2030: the unexpected burden of thyroid, liver, and pancreas cancers in the United States. Cancer Res. 2014;74:2913–2921.
    CrossRef
75. Renehan A.G, Tyson M, Egger M, Heller R.F, Zwahlen M.  Body-mass index and incidence of cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective observational studies. Lancet. 2008;371:569–578.
    CrossRef
76. Ritte R, Lukanova A, Berrino F, Dossus L, Tjønneland A, Olsen A, Overvad T.F, Overvad K, Clavel-Chapelon F, Fournier A, Fagherazzi G, Rohrmann S, Teucher B, Boeing H, Aleksandrova K, Trichopoulou A, Lagiou P, Trichopoulos D, Palli D, Sieri S, Panico S, Tumino R, Vineis P, Quirós J.R, Buckland G, Sánchez M.J, Amiano P, Chirlaque M.D, Ardanaz E, Sund M, et al.  Adiposity, hormone replacement therapy use and breast cancer risk by age and hormone receptor status: a large prospective cohort study. Breast Cancer Res. 2012;14:76.
    CrossRef
77. Rosner B.A, Colditz G.A, Hankinson S.E, Sullivan-Halley J, Lacey J.V Jr, Bernstein L. Validation of Rosner-Colditz breast cancer incidence model using an independent data set, the California Teachers Study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;142:187–202.
    CrossRef
78. Schonfeld S.J, Pee D, Greenlee R.T, Hartge P, Lacey J.V Jr, Park Y, Schatzkin A, Visvanathan K, Pfeiffer R.M.  Effect of changing breast cancer incidence rates on the calibration of the Gail model. J. Clin Oncol 2010;28:2411–2417.
    CrossRef
79. Sharma P, Sahni N.S, Tibshirani R, Skaane P, Urdal P, Berghagen H, Jensen M, Kristiansen L, Moen C, Sharma P, Zaka A, Arnes J, Sauer T, Akslen L.A, Schlichting E, Børresen-Dale A.L, Lönneborg A. Early detection of breast cancer based on gene-expression patterns in peripheral blood cells. Breast Cancer Res. 2005;7:634–644.
    CrossRef
80. Stacey S.N, Manolescu A, Sulem P, Thorlacius S, Gudjonsson S.A, Jonsson G.F, Jakobsdottir M, Bergthorsson J.T, Gudmundsson J, Aben K.K, Strobbe L.J, Swinkels D.W, Engelenburg v.K.C, Henderson B.E, Kolonel L.N,  Marchand L.L, Millastre E, Andres R, Saez B, Lambea J, Godino J, Polo E, Tres A, Picelli S, Rantala J, Margolin S, Jonsson T, Sigurdsson H, Jonsdottir T, Hrafnkelsson J, et al. Common variants on chromosome 5p12 confer susceptibility to estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Nat Genet. 2008;40:703–706.
    CrossRef
81. Steward W.P, Brown K. Cancer chemoprevention: a rapidly evolving field. Br J Cancer. 2013;109:1–7.
    CrossRef
82. Tikk K, Sookthai D, Johnson T, Rinaldi S, Romieu I, Tjønneland A, Olsen A, Overvad K, Clavel-Chapelon F, Baglietto L, Boeing H, Trichopoulou A, Lagiou P, Trichopoulos D, Palli D, Pala V, Tumino R, Rosso S, Panico S, Agudo A, Menéndez V, Sánchez M.J, Amiano P.H, Castaño J.M, Ardanaz E, Bueno-de-Mesquita H.B, Monninkhof E, Onland-Moret C, Andersson A, Sund M, et al. Circulating prolactin and breast cancer risk among pre- and post-menopausal women in the EPIC cohort. Ann Oncol. 2014;25:1422–1428.
    CrossRef
83. Tryggvadottir L, Sigvaldason H, Olafsdottir G.H, Jonasson J.G, Jonsson T, Tulinius H, Eyfjörd J.E.  Population-based study of changing breast cancer risk in Icelandic BRCA2 mutation carriers, 1920–2000. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:116–122.
    CrossRef
84. Tworoger S.S, Eliassen A.H, Zhang X, Qian J, Sluss P.M, Rosner B.A, Hankinson S.E. A 20-year prospective study of plasma prolactin as a risk marker of breast cancer development. Cancer Res. 2013;73:4810–4819.
    CrossRef
85. Tworoger S.S, Zhang X, Eliassen A.H, Qian J, Colditz G.A, Willett W.C, Rosner B.A, Kraft P, Hankinson S.E.  Inclusion of endogenous hormone levels in risk prediction models of post-menopausal breast cancer. J. Clin Oncol. 2014 Oct 1;32(28):3111-7.
    CrossRef
86. Tyrer J, Duffy S.W, Cuzick J. A breast cancer prediction model incorporating familial and personal risk factors. Stat Med. 2004;23:1111–1130.
    CrossRef
87. Wacholder S, Hartge P, Prentice R, Garcia-Closas M, Feigelson H.S, Diver W.R, Thun M.J, Cox D.G, Hankinson S.E, Kraft P, Rosner B, Berg C.D, Brinton L.A, Lissowska J, Sherman M.E, Chlebowski R, Kooperberg C, Jackson R.D, Buckman D.W, Hui P, Pfeiffer R, Jacobs K.B, Thomas G.D, Hoover R.N, Gail M.H, Chanock S.J, Hunter D.J. Performance of common genetic variants in breast-cancer risk models. N Engl .J. Med 2010;362:986–993.
    CrossRef
88. WCRFI: World Cancer Research Fund International: Cancer preventability estimates for food, nutrition, body fatness, and physical activity. http://www.wcrf.org/ cancer_statistics/preventability_estimates/preventability_estimates_food.php.
89. Zhang S.M, Hankinson S.E, Hunter D.J, Giovannucci E.L, Colditz G.A, Willett W.C.  Folate intake and risk of breast cancer characterized by hormone receptor status. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2005;14:2004–2008.
    CrossRef

(Visited 562 times, 1 visits today)