Evidence Hub

Prevention of breast cancer in postmenopausal women: approaches to estimating and reducing risk

Cummings SR, Tice JA, Bauer S, Browner WS, Cuzick J, Ziv E, Vogel V, Shepherd J et al.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2009

165 citations

Abstract

Background: It is uncertain whether evidence supports routinely estimating a postmenopausal woman's risk of breast cancer and intervening to reduce risk.

Methods: We systematically reviewed prospective studies about models and sex hormone levels to assess breast cancer risk and used meta-analysis with random effects models to summarize the predictive accuracy of breast density. We also reviewed prospective studies of the effects of exercise, weight management, healthy diet, moderate alcohol consumption, and fruit and vegetable intake on breast cancer risk, and used random effects models for a meta-analyses of tamoxifen and raloxifene for primary prevention of breast cancer. All studies reviewed were published before June 2008, and all statistical tests were two-sided.

Results: Risk models that are based on demographic characteristics and medical history had modest discriminatory accuracy for estimating breast cancer risk (c-statistics range = 0.58-0.63). Breast density was strongly associated with breast cancer (relative risk [RR] = 4.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.10 to 5.26, for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category IV vs category I; RR = 4.20, 95% CI = 3.61 to 4.89, for >75% vs <5% of dense area), and adding breast density to models improved discriminatory accuracy (c-statistics range = 0.63-0.66). Estradiol was also associated with breast cancer (RR range = 2.0-2.9, comparing the highest vs lowest quintile of estradiol, P < .01). Most studies found that…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free