0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Original Investigation |

A Prospective Study of Female Hormone Use and Breast Cancer Among Black Women FREE

Lynn Rosenberg, ScD; Julie R. Palmer, ScD; Lauren A. Wise, ScD; Lucile L. Adams-Campbell, PhD
[+] Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Slone Epidemiology Center, Boston University, Boston, Mass (Drs Rosenberg, Palmer, and Wise); and Howard University Cancer Center, Howard University, Washington, DC (Dr Adams-Campbell).


Arch Intern Med. 2006;166(7):760-765. doi:10.1001/archinte.166.7.760.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Background  Epidemiologic studies, largely of white women, have found that recent long-term female hormone use, particularly use of estrogen with progestin, is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. Some studies suggest that the increase is greater among leaner women. Our aim was to assess the relation of female hormone use to incidence of breast cancer in black women, with attention to differences in effect according to body mass index.

Methods  Data on female hormone use, breast cancer risk factors, and the occurrence of breast cancer were collected through biennial questionnaires from 1995 through 2003 in the Black Women's Health Study, a follow-up study of US black women. During 182 629 person-years of follow-up of 32 559 women 40 years or older, 615 cases of breast cancer were reported.

Results  The incidence rate ratio for breast cancer in women recently using female hormone supplements relative to those who had never used female hormones, with control for confounding factors, increased with duration of use and was 1.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-2.23) for 10 or more years of use; the incidence rate ratios were 1.41 (95% CI, 0.95-2.10) for 10 or more years of use of estrogen alone, and 1.45 (95% CI, 0.94-2.23) for 5 or more years of use of estrogen with progestin. The association of breast cancer with female hormone use was stronger among leaner women (body mass index [calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters] <25) than among heavier women. Among the leaner women who recently used female hormone supplements for durations of 10 or more years, the incidence rate ratio was 3.08 (95% CI, 1.70-5.56); the corresponding estimates among women with body mass indexes of 25 to 29 and 30 or greater were 1.43 and 0.91, respectively, and neither was statistically significant.

Conclusion  These results based on data from US black women strengthen the evidence that use of estrogen alone and estrogen with progestin increases the risk of breast cancer and that the association is stronger among leaner women.

Many observational studies suggest that the risk of breast cancer is increased by the long-term use of female hormone supplements, particularly the use of estrogen with progestin; the associations have been strongest for recent use, variously defined as current use or use within the previous 1 to 5 years.114 In the largest randomized trial to date, the Women's Health Initiative (WHI),15 the relative risk of breast cancer for women randomized to use of estrogen with progestin was 1.26 after 5 years of follow-up, and the increase among users was larger among those who had taken female hormone supplements before the trial. Breast cancer risk was not increased among women using estrogen alone in the WHI.16

Belief that an association represents cause and effect is strengthened when similar results are obtained across different populations. Black women take female hormone supplements less frequently compared with white women, and the distribution of risk factors for breast cancer also differs between these ethnic groups.1721 Most of the women included in previous studies of female hormone use and breast cancer have been white, and there is little information on the effect of female hormone use on breast cancer risk in black women specifically. A case-control study that included 1870 black women with breast cancer reported that continuous use of combined estrogen and progestin was associated with an increased risk of breast cancer for all ethnic groups combined and that the association was not significantly modified by ethnic group.10 In a combined reanalysis of data from many observational studies that included 52 705 women with breast cancer and 108 411 women without breast cancer, 2% of the subjects were of races other than white; breast cancer risk was increased among those taking female hormone supplements in both white and nonwhite women, but the confidence interval among the latter group was too wide to be informative.2 In the WHI, in which approximately 10% of the women were of races other than white, the associations of breast cancer with female hormone use were not modified by racial/ethnic group.15,16 In the present study, we assessed the relation of female hormone use to breast cancer incidence in black women, with data obtained in a nationwide follow-up study, the Black Women's Health Study (BWHS).

Some studies have found that the association of female hormone use with breast cancer risk differs according to body mass index (BMI; calculated as weight in kilograms divided by the square of height in meters), with greater increases in breast cancer risk for leaner female hormone users.26 The distribution of BMI among US black women differs markedly from that among US white women, with a greater prevalence of overweight and obesity among black women.22 We thought it would be of particular interest to assess whether the effect of female hormone use varied according to BMI among BWHS participants.

Female hormone use declined dramatically after the release of the WHI results,23 and selective changes in use associated with breast cancer risk could lead to bias in future observational studies. Therefore, we assessed the relation of female hormone use to breast cancer incidence in the BWHS using female hormone data collected before the WHI results were published.

The BWHS began in 1995, when 64 500 black women aged 21 to 69 years were enrolled through postal health questionnaires. Most of the enrollees were subscribers to Essence magazine, a popular magazine targeted to black women, and small numbers were members of selected professional organizations or friends or relatives of early respondents. Of the enrollees, 27% lived in the Northeast, 29% in the South, 23% in the Midwest, and 21% in the West. The 59 000 participants whose addresses were judged to be valid 1 year after entry have been followed through biennial postal questionnaires.24 Follow-up questionnaires were completed by 91% of the original cohort in 1997, 88% in 1999, 83% in 2001, and 80% in 2003; during the 8 years of follow-up, 2% of the cohort died. The institutional review boards of Boston University Medical Center, Boston, Mass, and Howard University Cancer Center, Washington, DC, approved the BWHS.

The baseline questionnaire included questions about the use of female hormones (recency of use, duration, and type of preparation last used), menopausal status, and medical history. The follow-up questionnaires asked about these factors and the occurrence of breast cancer in the previous 2 years. The present analyses used data from baseline in 1995 through the 2003 follow-up cycle.

Review of medical records of incident cases of breast cancer for validation of self-report is an ongoing process in the BWHS. To date, 65% of the women approached who reported breast cancer have agreed to release their medical records for review; the reasons cited by most women who did not sign a release were mistrust of the medical establishment and concern about confidentiality. We have thus far obtained medical records for 299 women who reported breast cancer during follow-up; 296 cases (98%) were confirmed to be breast cancer (88% invasive and 12% in situ). The 3 unconfirmed cases were excluded. Female hormone use and menopausal status among women who consented to release their records were similar to those among women who refused, allaying concern that women's willingness to release their records was associated with female hormone use.

We defined recent use of female hormones as use within the previous 2 years of any oral medications or patches containing female hormones and past use as use that had ceased more than 2 years previously. Because most female hormone use reported was of pills (88%-90% of use in each of the 4 follow-up cycles), it was not possible to informatively assess the use of patches or injections separately (they accounted for 8%-11% and <1% of use, respectively).

Breast cancer occurring in a particular follow-up cycle was assessed in relation to exposure data from the previous cycle (eg, breast cancer reported on the 1999 questionnaire in relation to female hormone use reported on the 1997 questionnaire). Women contributed person-years of female hormone use or nonuse during each follow-up cycle. Over the course of follow-up, a woman could contribute person-years of use of estrogen alone, estrogen with progestin, progestin alone, and nonuse.

After excluding women who had breast cancer at baseline, were currently taking oral contraceptives, had unknown menopausal status, or did not complete the female hormone questions, 32 559 women were followed up for breast cancer incidence. Because women younger than 40 years rarely take female hormone supplements, the analysis was confined to women 40 years or older at baseline (23 191 women) or who reached age 40 years during follow-up (9368 women).

We used age-stratified Cox regression models (SAS version 8.2; SAS Institute Inc, Cary, NC) to derive incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for breast cancer in relation to female hormone use, with control for confounding factors. Women contributed person-years from baseline to the time of diagnosis of breast cancer, loss to follow-up, death, or the end of follow-up (March 2003), whichever came first. The Anderson-Gill data structure was used to handle time-varying covariates.25,26

As shown in Table 1, among 23 191 women 40 years or older at baseline, female hormone use was associated positively with being postmenopausal (particularly because of bilateral oophorectomy), menopause before age 50 years, menarche at 14 years or older, benign breast disease, living in the West, and having had a mammogram in the previous 2 years.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Female Hormone Use Among 23 191 Women 40 Years or Older at Baseline According to Selected Characteristics, Black Women's Health Study (1995)

We controlled for menopausal status (premenopausal, naturally menopausal, bilateral oophorectomy, and hysterectomy) and age at menopause in the final Cox regression models; for women with a simple hysterectomy (hysterectomy without removal of both ovaries), the age at hysterectomy was used as the age at menopause. We carried out a secondary analysis confined to women who had not had a simple hysterectomy (ie, premenopausal women and women who were postmenopausal owing to bilateral oophorectomy or natural causes). With respect to potential confounding factors other than age, menopausal status, and age at menopause, the IRRs changed less than 10% after control for age at menarche, age at first birth, parity, oral contraceptive use, BMI, vigorous exercise, benign breast disease, alcohol use, family history of breast cancer, years of education, and geographic region. The IRRs presented in the “Results” section are adjusted for age, menopausal status, and age at menopause only. Information on the use of mammography in the previous 2 years was obtained on each follow-up questionnaire. To assess whether having undergone mammography affected the association between female hormone use and breast cancer risk, we conducted a secondary analysis that excluded noncases who had not had a mammogram in the previous 2 years.

During 182 629 person-years of follow-up of 23 304 BWHS participants during 1995 through 2003, 615 cases of breast cancer were reported (Table 2). The IRR point estimate was greater for recent (1.15) than for past (0.94) use and also greater for recent use of estrogen with progestin (1.28) than for recent use of estrogen alone (1.10), but all of these estimates were compatible with 1.0 and each other. The IRR increased with increasing duration of recent female hormone use and was 1.58 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-2.23) for 10 or more years of use (P = .08, test for trend); the IRR was 1.23 (95% CI, 0.82-1.84) for 5 to 9 years of estrogen use alone, 1.41 (95% CI, 0.95-2.10) for 10 or more years of use of estrogen alone, and 1.45 (95% CI, 0.94-2.23) for 5 or more years of use of estrogen with progestin. There were too few users of progestin alone for informative results on this hormone. The results were closely similar when we excluded women who had not had a mammogram in the previous 2 years (data not shown).

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Female Hormone Use in Relation to Risk of Breast Cancer Among Women 40 Years or Older, Black Women's Health Study (1995-2003)

As shown in Table 3, almost all of the IRRs were highest among the leanest women, those with a BMI less than 25. Among the leanest women, the IRR was 1.54 (95% CI, 1.06-2.26) for recent female hormone use, 1.41 (95% CI, 0.85-2.33) for recent use of estrogen alone, and 1.65 (95% CI, 1.02-2.68) for recent use of estrogen with progestin. The IRR for recent users increased with duration of use and was 3.08 (95% CI, 1.70-5.56) for 10 or more years of female hormone use (P = .02, test for trend). Among women with a BMI of 25 to 29, the IRRs for longer-duration use were elevated but less so than among women with a BMI of less than 25: the IRR was 1.43 for 10 or more years of female hormone use among recent users, 1.37 for recent users with 10 or more years of use of estrogen only, and 1.38 for recent users with 5 or more years of use of estrogen with progestin, but the 95% CIs for all of the IRR estimates included 1.0. Among women with a BMI of 30 or greater, all of the IRR point estimates were close to 1.0 and all of the 95% CIs included 1.0.

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Female Hormone Use in Relation to Risk of Breast Cancer Among Women 40 Years or Older, Stratified by BMI, Black Women's Health Study (1995-2003)

We examined IRRs among strata of other risk factors for breast cancer, including alcohol consumption, benign breast disease, parity, and oral contraceptive use. The associations of female hormone use with breast cancer risk did not vary materially across strata of these factors, but strata-specific numbers of users tended to be small. Numbers were too small to assess modification by family history of breast cancer.

To assess whether the association of female hormone use with breast cancer risk was consistent across socioeconomic strata, we examined IRRs among subgroups of educational attainment. The IRRs were similar across the strata: for 10 or more years of recent female hormone use, the IRR estimates among women with 12 or less, 13 to 15, and 16 or more years of education were 1.63 (95% CI, 0.83-3.21), 1.66 (95% CI, 0.87-3.15), and 1.54 (95% CI, 0.92-2.59), respectively.

Because it is not possible to accurately determine and fully control age at menopause for women with a simple hysterectomy,27 we carried out a secondary analysis among the 26 470 women remaining after exclusion of those women. The results were closely similar to those presented.

The present results suggest that recent long-term female hormone use increases the risk of breast cancer among US black women. The findings apply to female hormone pills, which accounted for most of the use among women in the BWHS. About 10% of the women used transdermal hormones. In a large British follow-up study, the Million Women Study, the relative risks did not differ between those taking oral and transdermal estrogen supplements.4

In the present study, risk of breast cancer increased with increasing duration of female hormone use; the overall IRR was 1.41 (95% CI, 0.95-2.10) for 10 or more years of estrogen use and 1.45 (95% CI, 0.94-2.23) for 5 or more years of use of estrogen with progestin. Most previous studies, largely of white women, have found an increased risk of breast cancer associated with use of estrogen with progestin and that risk increases with duration of use.217,28 In the WHI, the hazard ratio for women using estrogen with progestin was 1.26 (95% CI, 1.00-1.59) at the end of 5 years of follow-up; the risk was greater for those who had taken female hormone supplements previously (eg, 1.81 for those with ≥10 years of previous use).15 Findings concerning estrogen alone have been less consistent. Many observational studies have reported an adverse effect of use of estrogen alone on breast cancer risk. In the combined analysis of more than 50 000 cases2 and in the Million Women Study,4 the relative risks for use of estrogen alone for 5 or more years were both 1.34 and statistically significant. In the follow-up study by Kerlikowske et al29 of women who underwent mammography examinations from 1996 to 2000, although the relative risk was significantly increased for women who used estrogen with progestin for 5 years or more, the corresponding estimate for those using estrogen alone for 5 years or more was decreased (0.92 [95% CI, 0.84-1.00]). However, this study is likely to have underestimated an adverse effect of estrogen alone, as well as of estrogen with progestin, because age at menopause was not controlled2,27; younger age at menopause is strongly inversely associated with breast cancer risk and positively associated with female hormone use, and allowance for it increases the risk estimates for those taking female hormone supplements. In contrast to the observational results, there was no increase in the risk of breast cancer among women using estrogen in the WHI; indeed, the hazard ratio was 0.77 and close to statistical significance (95% CI, 0.59-1.01).16 Convincing reasons for the discrepancy between the WHI results and the observational results, other than chance, are lacking.

The present finding that associations were strongest among the leaner women agrees with previous observational results.26 The WHI did not find a significant modifying effect of BMI on the association between use of estrogen with progestin and increased breast cancer risk. However, the P value for interaction was .12, and the point estimates of risk were greater among women with a BMI of less than 30 than among heavier women.30 For estrogen use alone, the WHI found no modifying effect of BMI.16 Previous observational studies and the WHI216,30 have not found evidence of a modifying effect of other risk factors on the associations of female hormone use with breast cancer risk, nor did the present study.

Associations of exogenous female hormone use with increased risk of breast cancer are biologically plausible. Endogenous estrogens are associated with increased risk of breast cancer.31,32 Progestin can act as a breast mitogen,33,34 which could explain a greater increase for combination therapy. The production of estrogen from adipose tissue is greater among heavier postmenopausal women compared with leaner women31; therefore, exogenous estrogens may have less of an effect on estrogen levels in heavier women, perhaps explaining the stronger association with female hormone supplement use in leaner women.

Selective losses are not a major concern in the present study because follow-up rates were satisfactory: more than 80% of the original cohort members who were still alive after 8 years of follow-up were still participating. Moreover, female hormone use and other important characteristics at baseline, such as menopausal status, of women who completed the final follow-up questionnaire in the period analyzed in the present report and women who did not were similar; this suggests the absence of selective losses.

The women reported their mammography use on each of the biennial follow-up questionnaires, and high proportions had undergone mammography. Thus, greater detection of breast cancer among those taking female hormone supplements due to greater medical surveillance is unlikely to explain the findings, particularly because results changed little when women who did not have a recent mammogram were excluded from the analysis.

The exposure data were collected prospectively, thereby eliminating reporting bias. Because the exposure data were collected before the release of the results of the WHI,15 changes in female hormone use in response to those findings cannot explain our results. Misclassification of use of estrogen taken with progestin as use of estrogen alone, and vice versa, would have resulted in overestimation of an effect of estrogen alone and underestimation of an effect of estrogen with progestin.

Misclassification of breast cancer cases was unlikely to have affected the results because self-report was accurate among the cases confirmed by medical records; in addition, the cases confirmed with medical records were similar to those for whom records were not obtained. However, the obtainment of medical records for only half of the cases in the present analyses made it infeasible to assess the effect of female hormone use according to factors such as the stage of the cancer or estrogen receptor status. Some observational data suggest that female hormone use is associated with early-stage breast cancer,4 but the use of estrogen with progestin was associated with more advanced stages of breast cancer in the WHI.15,30 A few studies have suggested that female hormone use is associated with estrogen receptor–positive tumors.13,35,36

The present results were consistent across strata of education. Virtually all participants in the BWHS have completed high school and, nationally, about 83% of black women of the same ages as BWHS participants have completed high school.37 In addition, BWHS participants resemble black women in other studies in terms of the distributions of risk factors for breast cancer such as age at menarche,18,21 age at first birth,18,20,21 and long-term oral contraceptive use.18,21 Thus, the present results are likely to be applicable to most US black women.

In summary, the present findings based on data from US black women strengthen the evidence that use of female hormone supplements increases the risk of breast cancer.

Correspondence: Lynn Rosenberg, ScD, Slone Epidemiology Center, Boston University, 1010 Commonwealth Ave, Boston, MA 02215 (lrosenberg@slone.bu.edu).

Accepted for Publication: October 20, 2005.

Author Contributions: The authors had full access to all the data and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Financial Disclosure: None.

Funding/Support: This study was supported by grant CA58420 from the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Md.

Acknowledgment: We acknowledge the dedication of the Black Women's Health Study participants and staff.

Brinton  LASchairer  C Estrogen replacement therapy and breast cancer risk. Epidemiol Rev 1993;1566- 79
PubMed
Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer, Breast cancer and hormone replacement therapy: collaborative reanalysis of data from 51 epidemiological studies of 52,705 women with breast cancer and 108,411 women without breast cancer. Lancet 1997;3501047- 1059
PubMed Link to Article
La Vecchia  C Estrogen and combined estrogen-progestogen therapy in the menopause and breast cancer. Breast 2004;13515- 518
PubMed Link to Article
Million Women Study Collaborators, Breast cancer and hormone-replacement therapy in the Million Women Study. Lancet 2003;362419- 427
PubMed Link to Article
Schairer  CLubin  JTroisi  RSturgeon  SBrinton  LHoover  R Menopausal estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk. JAMA 2000;283485- 491
PubMed Link to Article
Magnusson  CBaron  JACorreia  N  et al.  Breast cancer risk following long-term estrogen and estrogen-progestin-replacement therapy. Int J Cancer 1999;81339- 344
PubMed Link to Article
Persson  IWeiderpass  EBergkvist  LBergström  RShairer  C Risks of breast and endometrial cancer after estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement. Cancer Causes Control 1999;10253- 260
PubMed Link to Article
Ross  RKPaganini-Hill  AWan  PCPike  MC Effect of hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk: estrogen versus estrogen plus progestin. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92328- 332
PubMed Link to Article
Kirsh  VKreiger  N Estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer in Canada. Cancer Causes Control 2002;13583- 590
PubMed Link to Article
Weiss  LKBurkman  RTCushing-Haugen  KL  et al.  Hormone replacement therapies and breast cancer risk. Obstet Gynecol 2002;1001148- 1158
PubMed Link to Article
Porch  JVLee  I-MCook  NR  et al.  Estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk: the Women's Health Study (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2002;13847- 854
PubMed Link to Article
Chen  CLWeiss  NSNewcomb  PBarlow  WWhite  E Hormone replacement therapy in relation to breast cancer. JAMA 2002;287734- 741
PubMed Link to Article
Li  CIMalone  KEPorter  PL  et al.  Relationship between long durations and different regimens of hormone therapy and risk of breast cancer. JAMA 2003;2893254- 3263
PubMed Link to Article
Stahlberg  CPedersen  ATLynge  E  et al.  Increased risk of breast cancer following different regimens of hormone replacement therapy frequently used in Europe. Int J Cancer 2004;109721- 727
PubMed Link to Article
Rossouw  JEAnderson  GLPrentice  RL  et al. Writing Group for the Women's Health Initiative Investigators, Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002;288321- 333
PubMed Link to Article
Anderson  GLLimacher  MAssaf  AR  et al. Women's Health Initiative Steering Committee, Effects of conjugated equine estrogen in postmenopausal women with hysterectomy: the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004;2911701- 1712
PubMed Link to Article
Pike  MCKolonel  LNHendersen  BE  et al.  Breast cancer in a multiethnic cohort in Hawaii and Los Angeles: risk factor-adjusted incidence in Japanese equals and in Hawaiians exceeds that in whites. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11795- 800
PubMed
Hall  IJMoorman  PGMillikan  RCNewman  B Comparative analysis of breast cancer risk factors among African-American women and White women. Am J Epidemiol 2005;16140- 51
PubMed Link to Article
Chlebowski  RTChen  ZAnderson  GL  et al.  Ethnicity and breast cancer: factors influencing differences in incidence and outcome. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97439- 448
PubMed Link to Article
Ursin  GBernstein  LWang  Y  et al.  Reproductive factors and risk of breast carcinoma in a study of white and African-American women. Cancer 2004;101353- 362
PubMed Link to Article
Brinton  LABenichou  JGammon  MDBrogan  DRCoates  RSchoenberg  JB Ethnicity and variation in breast cancer incidence. Int J Cancer 1997;73349- 355
PubMed Link to Article
Flegal  KMCarroll  MDOgden  CLJohnson  CL Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999-2000. JAMA 2002;2881723- 1727
PubMed Link to Article
Hersh  ALStefanick  MLStafford  RS National use of postmenopausal hormone therapy: annual trends and response to recent evidence. JAMA 2004;29147- 53
PubMed Link to Article
Palmer  JRWise  LAAdams-Campbell  LLRosenberg  L A prospective study of induced abortion and breast cancer in African-American women. Cancer Causes Control 2004;15105- 111
PubMed Link to Article
Therneau  TM Extending the Cox model. Lin  DYFleming  TRedsProceedings of the First Seattle Symposium in Biostatistics Survival Analysis. New York, NY Springer-Verlag1997;
Allison  PD Survival Analysis Using the SAS System: A Practical Guide.  Cary, NC SAS Institute Inc1995;
Pike  MCRoss  RKSpicer  DV Problems involved in including women with simple hysterectomy in epidemiologic studies measuring the effects of hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk. Am J Epidemiol 1998;147718- 721
PubMed Link to Article
Hulley  SFerber  CBarrett-Connor  E  et al. HERS Research Group, Noncardiovascular outcomes during 6.8 years of hormone therapy: Heart and Estrogen Replacement Study Follow-up (HERS II). JAMA 2002;28858- 66
PubMed Link to Article
Kerlikowske  KMiglioretti  DLBallard-Barbash  R  et al.  Prognostic characteristics of breast cancer among postmenopausal female hormone users in a screened population. J Clin Oncol 2003;214314- 4321
PubMed Link to Article
Chlebowski  RTHendrix  SLLanger  RD  et al.  Influence of estrogen plus progestin on breast cancer and mammography in healthy postmenopausal women: the Women's Health Initiative Randomized Trial. JAMA 2003;2893243- 3253
PubMed Link to Article
Bernstein  LRoss  RK Endogenous hormones and breast cancer risk. Epidemiol Rev 1993;1548- 65
PubMed
The Endogenous Hormones and Breast Cancer Collaborative Group, Endogenous sex hormones and breast cancer in postmenopausal women: reanalysis of nine prospective studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94606- 616
PubMed Link to Article
Pike  MCSpice  DVDahmoush  LPress  MF Estrogen, progestogens, normal breast cell proliferation, and breast cancer risk. Epidemiol Rev 1993;1517- 35
PubMed
Ferguson  DJPAnderson  TJ Morphological evaluation of cell turnover in relation to the menstrual cycle in the “resting” human breast. Br J Cancer 1981;44177- 179
PubMed Link to Article
Gajdos  CTartter  PIBabinski  A Breast cancer diagnosed during hormone replacement therapy. Obstet Gynecol 2000;95513- 518
PubMed Link to Article
Ursin  GTseng  CCPaganini-Hill  A  et al.  Does menopausal hormone replacement therapy interact with known risk factors and increase risk of breast cancer? J Clin Oncol 2002;20699- 706
PubMed Link to Article
US Census Bureau, Educational attainment in the United States: March 1998 (update) (Current Population Reports P20-543).  Washington, DC US Dept of Commerce1998;

Figures

Tables

Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 3. Female Hormone Use in Relation to Risk of Breast Cancer Among Women 40 Years or Older, Stratified by BMI, Black Women's Health Study (1995-2003)
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 2. Female Hormone Use in Relation to Risk of Breast Cancer Among Women 40 Years or Older, Black Women's Health Study (1995-2003)
Table Graphic Jump LocationTable 1. Female Hormone Use Among 23 191 Women 40 Years or Older at Baseline According to Selected Characteristics, Black Women's Health Study (1995)

References

Brinton  LASchairer  C Estrogen replacement therapy and breast cancer risk. Epidemiol Rev 1993;1566- 79
PubMed
Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer, Breast cancer and hormone replacement therapy: collaborative reanalysis of data from 51 epidemiological studies of 52,705 women with breast cancer and 108,411 women without breast cancer. Lancet 1997;3501047- 1059
PubMed Link to Article
La Vecchia  C Estrogen and combined estrogen-progestogen therapy in the menopause and breast cancer. Breast 2004;13515- 518
PubMed Link to Article
Million Women Study Collaborators, Breast cancer and hormone-replacement therapy in the Million Women Study. Lancet 2003;362419- 427
PubMed Link to Article
Schairer  CLubin  JTroisi  RSturgeon  SBrinton  LHoover  R Menopausal estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk. JAMA 2000;283485- 491
PubMed Link to Article
Magnusson  CBaron  JACorreia  N  et al.  Breast cancer risk following long-term estrogen and estrogen-progestin-replacement therapy. Int J Cancer 1999;81339- 344
PubMed Link to Article
Persson  IWeiderpass  EBergkvist  LBergström  RShairer  C Risks of breast and endometrial cancer after estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement. Cancer Causes Control 1999;10253- 260
PubMed Link to Article
Ross  RKPaganini-Hill  AWan  PCPike  MC Effect of hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk: estrogen versus estrogen plus progestin. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92328- 332
PubMed Link to Article
Kirsh  VKreiger  N Estrogen and estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer in Canada. Cancer Causes Control 2002;13583- 590
PubMed Link to Article
Weiss  LKBurkman  RTCushing-Haugen  KL  et al.  Hormone replacement therapies and breast cancer risk. Obstet Gynecol 2002;1001148- 1158
PubMed Link to Article
Porch  JVLee  I-MCook  NR  et al.  Estrogen-progestin replacement therapy and breast cancer risk: the Women's Health Study (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2002;13847- 854
PubMed Link to Article
Chen  CLWeiss  NSNewcomb  PBarlow  WWhite  E Hormone replacement therapy in relation to breast cancer. JAMA 2002;287734- 741
PubMed Link to Article
Li  CIMalone  KEPorter  PL  et al.  Relationship between long durations and different regimens of hormone therapy and risk of breast cancer. JAMA 2003;2893254- 3263
PubMed Link to Article
Stahlberg  CPedersen  ATLynge  E  et al.  Increased risk of breast cancer following different regimens of hormone replacement therapy frequently used in Europe. Int J Cancer 2004;109721- 727
PubMed Link to Article
Rossouw  JEAnderson  GLPrentice  RL  et al. Writing Group for the Women's Health Initiative Investigators, Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2002;288321- 333
PubMed Link to Article
Anderson  GLLimacher  MAssaf  AR  et al. Women's Health Initiative Steering Committee, Effects of conjugated equine estrogen in postmenopausal women with hysterectomy: the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2004;2911701- 1712
PubMed Link to Article
Pike  MCKolonel  LNHendersen  BE  et al.  Breast cancer in a multiethnic cohort in Hawaii and Los Angeles: risk factor-adjusted incidence in Japanese equals and in Hawaiians exceeds that in whites. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11795- 800
PubMed
Hall  IJMoorman  PGMillikan  RCNewman  B Comparative analysis of breast cancer risk factors among African-American women and White women. Am J Epidemiol 2005;16140- 51
PubMed Link to Article
Chlebowski  RTChen  ZAnderson  GL  et al.  Ethnicity and breast cancer: factors influencing differences in incidence and outcome. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97439- 448
PubMed Link to Article
Ursin  GBernstein  LWang  Y  et al.  Reproductive factors and risk of breast carcinoma in a study of white and African-American women. Cancer 2004;101353- 362
PubMed Link to Article
Brinton  LABenichou  JGammon  MDBrogan  DRCoates  RSchoenberg  JB Ethnicity and variation in breast cancer incidence. Int J Cancer 1997;73349- 355
PubMed Link to Article
Flegal  KMCarroll  MDOgden  CLJohnson  CL Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999-2000. JAMA 2002;2881723- 1727
PubMed Link to Article
Hersh  ALStefanick  MLStafford  RS National use of postmenopausal hormone therapy: annual trends and response to recent evidence. JAMA 2004;29147- 53
PubMed Link to Article
Palmer  JRWise  LAAdams-Campbell  LLRosenberg  L A prospective study of induced abortion and breast cancer in African-American women. Cancer Causes Control 2004;15105- 111
PubMed Link to Article
Therneau  TM Extending the Cox model. Lin  DYFleming  TRedsProceedings of the First Seattle Symposium in Biostatistics Survival Analysis. New York, NY Springer-Verlag1997;
Allison  PD Survival Analysis Using the SAS System: A Practical Guide.  Cary, NC SAS Institute Inc1995;
Pike  MCRoss  RKSpicer  DV Problems involved in including women with simple hysterectomy in epidemiologic studies measuring the effects of hormone replacement therapy on breast cancer risk. Am J Epidemiol 1998;147718- 721
PubMed Link to Article
Hulley  SFerber  CBarrett-Connor  E  et al. HERS Research Group, Noncardiovascular outcomes during 6.8 years of hormone therapy: Heart and Estrogen Replacement Study Follow-up (HERS II). JAMA 2002;28858- 66
PubMed Link to Article
Kerlikowske  KMiglioretti  DLBallard-Barbash  R  et al.  Prognostic characteristics of breast cancer among postmenopausal female hormone users in a screened population. J Clin Oncol 2003;214314- 4321
PubMed Link to Article
Chlebowski  RTHendrix  SLLanger  RD  et al.  Influence of estrogen plus progestin on breast cancer and mammography in healthy postmenopausal women: the Women's Health Initiative Randomized Trial. JAMA 2003;2893243- 3253
PubMed Link to Article
Bernstein  LRoss  RK Endogenous hormones and breast cancer risk. Epidemiol Rev 1993;1548- 65
PubMed
The Endogenous Hormones and Breast Cancer Collaborative Group, Endogenous sex hormones and breast cancer in postmenopausal women: reanalysis of nine prospective studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94606- 616
PubMed Link to Article
Pike  MCSpice  DVDahmoush  LPress  MF Estrogen, progestogens, normal breast cell proliferation, and breast cancer risk. Epidemiol Rev 1993;1517- 35
PubMed
Ferguson  DJPAnderson  TJ Morphological evaluation of cell turnover in relation to the menstrual cycle in the “resting” human breast. Br J Cancer 1981;44177- 179
PubMed Link to Article
Gajdos  CTartter  PIBabinski  A Breast cancer diagnosed during hormone replacement therapy. Obstet Gynecol 2000;95513- 518
PubMed Link to Article
Ursin  GTseng  CCPaganini-Hill  A  et al.  Does menopausal hormone replacement therapy interact with known risk factors and increase risk of breast cancer? J Clin Oncol 2002;20699- 706
PubMed Link to Article
US Census Bureau, Educational attainment in the United States: March 1998 (update) (Current Population Reports P20-543).  Washington, DC US Dept of Commerce1998;

Correspondence

CME
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 16

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles