Open Access

Body size, modifying factors, and postmenopausal breast cancer risk in a multiethnic population: the San Francisco Bay Area Breast Cancer Study

SpringerPlus20132:239

DOI: 10.1186/2193-1801-2-239

Received: 16 April 2013

Accepted: 29 April 2013

Published: 24 May 2013

Abstract

Data on body size and postmenopausal breast cancer in Hispanic and African American women are inconsistent, possibly due to the influence of modifying factors. We examined associations between adiposity and risk of breast cancer defined by hormone receptor status in a population-based case-control study conducted from 1995–2004 in the San Francisco Bay Area. Multivariate adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using unconditional logistic regression. Associations with body size were limited to women not currently using menopausal hormone therapy (801 cases, 1336 controls). High young-adult body mass index (BMI) was inversely associated with postmenopausal breast cancer risk, regardless of hormone receptor status, whereas high current BMI and high adult weight gain were associated with two-fold increased risk of estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor positive breast cancer, but only in women with a low young-adult BMI (≤22.4 kg/m2) or those with ≥15 years since menopause. Odds ratios were stronger among non-Hispanic Whites than Hispanics and African Americans. Waist circumference and waist-to-height ratio increased breast cancer risk in Hispanics and African Americans only, independent of BMI. These findings emphasize the importance of considering tumor hormone receptor status and other modifying factors in studies of racially/ethnically diverse populations.

Keywords

African Americans Body size Breast cancer Estrogen receptor Hispanics Progesterone receptor

Introduction

Obesity has long been recognized as a risk factor for postmenopausal breast cancer (BC) in studies of primarily non-Hispanic White (NHW) women (World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research 2007). Only three studies in Hispanics (Wenten et al. 2002; Slattery et al. 2007; White et al. 2012) and eight studies in African Americans (AA) (White et al. 2012; Austin et al. 1979; Schatzkin et al. 1987; Adams-Campbell et al. 1996; Hall et al. 2000; Zhu et al. 2005; Palmer et al. 2007; Berstad et al. 2010) examined the relation between obesity and postmenopausal BC risk, and some of their findings contradict those reported for NHW women, suggesting differences in effects by racial/ethnic groups (Slattery et al. 2007; Sexton et al. 2011). In NHWs, BC risk is increased by 3-5% both per 2 kg/m2 increase in body mass index (BMI) and per 5 kg of weight gain (World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research 2007). Young-adult obesity, on the other hand, has been associated with reduced postmenopausal BC risk, both in cohort (Barnes-Josiah et al. 1995; Huang et al. 1997; Morimoto et al. 2002; Ahn et al. 2007) and case–control (Berstad et al. 2010; Chu et al. 1991; Brinton & Swanson 1992; Magnusson et al. 1998) studies. A number of factors appear to modify the relation with body size. Increased risks associated with BMI and weight gain may be limited to women with a low young-adult BMI (Chu et al. 1991; Canchola et al. 2012). Stronger associations with body size have been found in women with estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor positive (ER+PR+) BC (Potter et al. 1995; Huang et al. 2000; Colditz et al. 2004; Suzuki et al. 2009), those not using menopausal hormone therapy (HT) (Morimoto et al. 2002; Friedenreich 2001; Feigelson et al. 2004), or with longer time since menopause (Chu et al. 1991; Magnusson et al. 1998; Macinnis et al. 2004). Data on abdominal obesity and BC risk in postmenopausal women are also inconsistent (World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research 2007) and uncertainties remain whether associations are independent of overall obesity or differ by race/ethnicity.

We report on the relation between overall and abdominal adiposity and risk of postmenopausal BC defined by hormone receptor status in a multiethnic population, and the role of modifying factors.

Materials and methods

Study population

The San Francisco Bay Area Breast Cancer Study, a population-based case-control study (John et al. 2003; John et al. 2005), identified 17,581 women aged 35–79 years with newly diagnosed invasive BC through the Greater Bay Area Cancer Registry. Following telephone screening on study eligibility (83% participation), 2,571 cases were selected (all Hispanics diagnosed from 1995–2002, all AAs diagnosed from 1995–1999, and a 10% random sample of NHWs diagnosed from 1995–1999). An in-person interview was completed by 2,258 (88%) cases, including 1,119 (89%) Hispanics, 543 (87%) AAs, and 596 (86%) NHWs.

Population controls, identified through random-digit dialing, were frequency-matched on race/ethnicity and 5-year age group (John et al. 2003). Of 3,170 eligible controls, 2,706 (85%) completed the in-person interview, including 1,462 (88%) Hispanics, 598 (82%) AAs, and 646 (83%) NHWs.

This analysis was restricted to postmenopausal women (1,389 cases, 1,644 controls). Women were considered postmenopausal if their periods had stopped more than one year prior to diagnosis (cases) or selection into the study (controls), if they reported a bilateral oophorectomy, or if they were aged ≥55 years at the time of diagnosis/selection and had either started hormone therapy prior to the cessation of menses or had had a simple hysterectomy (without oophorectomy).

Data collection

Information on adult height, weight in the reference year (defined as the calendar year before diagnosis for cases or before selection into the study for controls), young-adult weight, and other BC risk factors was collected using a structured questionnaire, administered in English or Spanish. Young-adult weight was based on reported weight at age 25–30 years for cases diagnosed before May 1998 and their matched controls, and on reported weight at age 20–29 years for cases diagnosed in May 1998 or later and their matched controls. Interviewers also took measurements of weight, height, waist and hip circumference (described in (John et al. 2010)). Lifetime physical activity was assessed, as described elsewhere (John et al. 2003). Usual dietary intake and alcohol consumption during the reference year was assessed by a modified version of the Block food frequency questionnaire (Block et al. 1986). Cancer registry information on ER and PR status was available for 85% of cases. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Cancer Prevention Institute of California and participants provided written informed consent.

Body size variables

Current BMI was calculated as weight (kg) divided by height squared (m2), based on measured height at interview (or self-reported height for 10% of cases and 9% of controls who declined height measurements) and self-reported weight in the reference year (or measured weight at interview for 1% of cases and 3% of controls without self-report). BMI was classified as normal weight (<25.0 kg/m2), overweight (25.0-29.9 kg/m2) and obese (≥30.0 kg/m2) (WHO 2000). Underweight (BMI <18.5 kg/m2) women (9 cases, 16 controls) were grouped with normal weight women. Young-adult BMI was based on measured height at interview and self-reported weight in a woman’s twenties. Adult weight gain was calculated as the difference between self-reported young-adult weight and weight in the reference year. Waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) was calculated as a measure of body fat distribution reflecting both adipose tissue and muscle mass; waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) was calculated as a measure of visceral adiposity independent of height, which may more directly reflect abdominal adiposity (Molarius & Seidell 1998). WHR, WHtR, and waist and hip circumferences were categorized according to the tertile distribution among controls.

Statistical analysis

Unconditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) comparing cases to controls, both overall and separately for each racial/ethnic group. Polytomous logistic regression was used to compare ER+PR+ and ER-PR- case groups with a common control group. For all BCs combined and ER+PR+ BCs, multivariate analyses were adjusted for age (continuous) and factors significantly associated with BC risk in our study: birth place, education, first-degree family history of BC, personal history of benign breast disease, age at menarche, number of full-term pregnancies, age at first full-term pregnancy, lifetime breast-feeding, average lifetime physical activity, alcohol consumption, and caloric intake, categorized as shown in the tables. For ER-PR- BCs, analyses were adjusted for age, birth place, age at menarche, and lifetime breast-feeding. Analyses of all BCs combined were also adjusted for race/ethnicity. Analyses of current BMI, young-adult BMI and weight gain were mutually adjusted for each other. Linear trends were assessed across ordinal values of categorical variables. Significant differences in ORs between groups were tested using the Wald statistic P value. Two-sided P values are reported for tests of trend and interaction, with P values <0.05 considered statistically significant.

We assessed associations with current BMI and weight change within strata defined by median young-adult BMI (≤22.4 kg/m2, >22.4 kg/m2), median time since menopause (<15, ≥15 years), and, in analyses of abdominal adiposity, by current BMI (<25.0 kg/m2, ≥25.0 kg/m2). Primary analyses were restricted to women not currently using menopausal HT, as previous studies have found no associations with body size among current HT users (Huang et al. 1997; Morimoto et al. 2002). Current HT use was defined as starting HT prior to the year of diagnosis/selection and reported use during the year of diagnosis/selection. All other women were classified as non-current HT users. Time since menopause was calculated as the difference between age at menopause and age at diagnosis/selection. Age at menopause was based on self-report for women with natural menopause and age at bilateral oophorectomy for women with surgical menopause.

The final analysis was based on 2,884 postmenopausal women (1,316 cases, 1,568 controls) after excluding 34 cases and 50 controls with missing information on confounding variables and 39 cases and 26 controls with unreliable caloric intake (<600 kcal/day or >5,000 kcal/day). Statistical analyses were conducted using SAS version 9.3 software (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, North Carolina).

Results

Cases were more likely than controls to be U.S.-born, have a first-degree family history of BC, a personal history of benign breast disease, higher education, earlier menarche, fewer full-term pregnancies, a shorter duration of breast-feeding, lower lifetime physical activity, and higher alcohol consumption (Table 1).
Table 1

Characteristics of postmenopausal cases and controls

 

Cases (n = 1,316)

Controls (n = 1,568)

P value

 

n

%a

n

%a

 

Age (years)

     

 35–44

20

2

25

2

 

 45–54

199

15

260

17

 

 55–64

531

40

625

40

 

 65–74

407

31

509

33

 

 ≥75

159

12

149

10

 

Race/ethnicity

     

 Hispanic

614

47

804

51

 

 Non-Hispanic White

389

30

399

26

 

 African American

313

24

365

23

 

Joint ER/PR status

     

 ER+PR+

714

54

   

 ER+PR-

168

13

   

 ER-PR+

21

2

   

 ER-PR-

204

16

   

 Missing

209

16

   

Menopausal hormone therapy use

    

<0.01

 Never

517

39

644

41

 

 Former

284

22

692

44

 

 Current

498

38

214

14

 

 Missing

17

1

18

1

 

Place of birth

    

<0.01

 U.S.-bornb

1,014

77

1,036

66

 

 Foreign-born

302

23

532

34

 

Education (years)

    

<0.01

 Some high school or less

398

30

600

38

 

 High school or vocational/technical school graduate

373

28

426

27

 

 Some college

297

23

297

19

 

 College graduate

248

19

245

16

 

Family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives

    

<0.01

 No

1,089

83

1,371

87

 

 Yes

227

17

197

13

 

Personal history of biopsy-confirmed benign breast disease

    

0.01

 No

1,016

77

1,274

81

 

 Yes

300

23

294

19

 

Age at menarche

    

<0.01

 ≤11

304

23

327

21

 

 12

349

27

356

23

 

 13

319

24

387

25

 

 ≥14

344

26

498

32

 

Parity

    

<0.01

 Nulliparous

169

13

145

9

 

 Parous

1,147

87

1,423

91

 

Number of full-term pregnancies, parous women

    

<0.01

 1

162

14

177

12

 

 2

309

27

303

21

 

 3

263

23

349

25

 

 ≥4

413

36

594

42

 

Age at first full-term pregnancy (years), parous women

    

<0.01

 ≤19

302

26

415

29

 

 20–24

462

40

564

40

 

 25–29

235

21

298

21

 

 ≥30

148

13

146

10

 

Lifetime breast-feeding (months), parous women

    

<0.01

 0

541

47

547

38

 

 ≤ 6

250

22

294

21

 

 7–12

97

8

148

10

 

 13–24

126

11

184

13

 

 ≥25

133

12

250

18

 

Lifetime physical activityc (hours/week)

    

0.04

 ≤ 6.9

376

29

391

25

 

 7.0-14.1

342

26

390

25

 

 14.2-25.4

291

22

403

26

 

 ≥25.5

307

23

384

25

 

Alcohol consumptiond,e (g/day)

    

<0.01

 0

763

58

975

62

 

 0.1-4.9

262

20

312

20

 

 5.0-9.9

68

5

91

6

 

 10.0-19.9

115

9

107

7

 

 ≥20

108

8

83

5

 

Total caloric intakec,d,e (kcal/day)

    

0.05

 ≤ 1362

287

22

394

25

 

 1363–1798

343

26

385

25

 

 1799–2435

379

29

398

25

 

 ≥2436

307

23

391

25

 

Abbreviations: ER-, estrogen receptor–negative; ER+, estrogen receptor–positive; PR-, progesterone receptor–negative; PR+, progesterone receptor–positive.

a Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.

b U.S.-born includes 43 cases and 34 controls born in westernized countries such as Canada, Europe, Australia, or New Zealand.

c Quartiles among all postmenopausal controls.

d In reference year.

e Excludes 39 cases and 26 controls whose total caloric intake was <600 kcal/day or >5,000 kcal/day.

Body size characteristics differed by race/ethnicity (Table 2). Among controls, the proportion of currently obese women (BMI ≥30.0 kg/m2) was higher in AAs and Hispanics than in NHWs. High young-adult BMI was twice as common in Hispanics as in NHWs, whereas the proportion of women with high weight gain was similar in the two groups. The prevalence of high weight gain, large waist and hip circumferences, and high WHR was lowest in NHWs, intermediate in Hispanics, and more than twice as high in AAs than in NHWs.
Table 2

Body size among control women by race/ethnicity

 

Hispanics (n = 804)

African Americans (n = 365)

Non-Hispanic Whites (n = 399)

P valuea

 

n

%b

n

%b

n

%b

 

Current BMI (kg/m2) c

      

* †

 <25.0

147

18

80

22

185

47

 25.0-29.9

310

39

124

34

116

29

 ≥30.0

342

43

159

44

97

24

Young-adult BMI (kg/m2) d,e

      

* ‡

 Q1: ≤20.6

125

17

116

32

130

33

 Q2: 20.7-22.4

170

23

83

23

118

30

 Q3: 22.5-24.7

210

29

84

23

76

19

 Q4: >24.7

225

31

77

21

69

18

Weight gain (kg) f

      

* † ‡

 Stable g

80

11

31

9

65

18

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

176

25

66

19

113

31

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

234

33

91

26

96

26

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

142

20

83

24

63

17

 Gain, ≥30.0

74

11

76

22

34

9

Waist (cm) d

      

* † ‡

 Q1: ≤ 82.3

170

22

41

14

150

43

 Q2: 82.4-90.5

211

27

65

22

77

22

 Q3: 90.6-99.8

196

25

90

30

67

19

 Q4: >99.8

195

25

102

34

57

16

Hip (cm) d

      

* † ‡

 Q1: ≤ 100.5

206

27

48

16

103

29

 Q2: 100.6-107.5

186

24

60

20

107

31

 Q3: 107.6-116.2

183

24

85

29

87

25

 Q4: >116.2

196

25

105

35

54

15

Waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) d

      

* † ‡

 Q1: ≤ 0.79

172

22

52

18

163

46

 Q2: 0.80-0.84

224

29

70

24

83

24

 Q3: 0.85-0.88

190

25

83

28

53

15

 Q4: >0.88

185

24

92

31

52

15

Waist-to-height ratio (WHtR) d

      

* †

 Q1: ≤ 0.52

138

18

56

19

162

46

 Q2: 0.53-0.58

195

25

78

26

82

23

 Q3: 0.59-0.64

216

28

81

27

58

17

 Q4: >0.64

223

29

83

28

49

14

Abbreviation: BMI, body mass index.

a Chi-square test for the difference between race/ethnicity; * = P <0.05 between non-Hispanic Whites and Hispanics; † = P <0.05 between non-Hispanic Whites and African Americans; ‡ = P <0.05 between Hispanics and African Americans.

b Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.

c Based on self-reported adult weight and measured height at interview (if not available, then based on measured weight at interview and/or self-reported adult height).

d Based on quartiles among all postmenopausal controls.

e Based on self-reported young-adult weight and measured height at interview (or self-reported adult height when measured height not available).

f Self-reported adult weight (or measured weight at interview if self-reported weight not available) minus self-reported young-adult weight; excludes 64 controls who lost >3 kg of weight.

g Stable weight defined as +/- 3 kg.

For women not currently using HT, associations with current BMI and adult weight gain were limited to those with ER+PR+ tumors, although after adjustment for weight gain, no association remained with current BMI (Table 3). The positive association with weight gain was not altered by adjustment for current BMI (Table 3) or young-adult BMI (data not shown), and was largely driven by the increased risk found for NHW women. Young-adult BMI was associated with reduced risk of postmenopausal BC, with similar results for BC overall (>23.7 vs. ≤21.2 kg/m2: OR = 0.68, 95% CI:0.54-0.86, Ptrend < 0.01) and ER+PR+ BC (>23.7 vs. ≤21.2 kg/m2: OR = 0.73, 95% CI:0.54-0.98, Ptrend = 0.04). Inverse associations, however, were found only among Hispanic and NHW women.
Table 3

BMI and weight gain and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women not currently using hormone therapy by race/ethnicity a and estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor status

 

All race/ethnicities

Hispanics

African Americans

Non-Hispanic Whites

All breast cancer

Cases (n = 801)

Controls (n = 1,336)

OR b 95% CI

Cases (n = 377)

Controls (n = 709)

OR c 95% CI

Cases (n = 243)

Controls (n = 315)

OR c 95% CI

Cases (n = 181)

Controls (n = 312)

OR c 95% CI

Current BMI (kg/m2) d

            

 <25.0

208

329

1.0

81

119

1.0

51

70

1.0

76

140

1.0

 25.0-29.9

278

476

0.95 0.74-1.21

133

273

0.78 0.54-1.14

90

106

1.19 0.74-1.94

55

97

0.90 0.56-1.43

 ≥30.0

312

523

0.94 0.74-1.20

161

312

0.77 0.53-1.12

101

137

1.07 0.66-1.73

50

74

1.19 0.72-1.99

   

Ptrend = 0.64

  

Ptrend = 0.24

  

Ptrend = 0.88

  

Ptrend = 0.58

Current BMI (kg/m2) –adjusted for weight gain d,e

            

 <25.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 25.0-29.9

  

0.90 0.67-1.20

  

0.80 0.52-1.25

  

1.25 0.70-2.26

  

0.63 0.34-1.16

 ≥30.0

  

0.79 0.56-1.13

  

0.73 0.43-1.24

  

1.15 0.57-2.30

  

0.52 0.22-1.22

   

Ptrend = 0.75

  

Ptrend = 0.26

  

Ptrend = 0.77

  

Ptrend = 0.11

Young-adult BMI (kg/m2) f,g

            

 T1: ≤21.2

286

402

1.0

109

161

1.0

93

122

1.0

84

119

1.0

 T2: 21.3-23.7

259

411

0.87 0.69-1.09

122

209

0.85 0.60-1.20

77

90

1.17 0.76-1.79

60

112

0.65 0.41-1.02

 T3: >23.7

216

445

0.68 0.54-0.86

115

272

0.63 0.45-0.90

67

98

0.93 0.59-1.45

34

75

0.52 0.30-0.90

   

Ptrend < 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.80

  

Ptrend = 0.01

Weight gain (kg) h,i

78

140

          

 Stable j

180

291

1.0

36

65

1.0

18

26

1.0

24

49

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

217

376

1.15 0.82-1.63

82

149

1.05 0.63-1.76

50

55

1.27 0.59-2.73

48

87

1.27 0.67-2.43

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

142

247

1.06 0.76-1.48

101

217

0.88 0.54-1.45

68

80

1.18 0.57-2.44

48

79

1.36 0.71-2.62

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

111

154

1.03 0.72-1.48

71

125

1.04 0.61-1.78

44

72

0.91 0.43-1.93

27

50

1.19 0.57-2.48

 Gain, ≥30.0

  

1.19 0.81-1.75

38

67

0.91 0.50-1.66

51

64

1.13 0.54-2.39

22

23

2.63 1.12-6.19

   

Ptrend = 0.75

  

Ptrend = 0.75

  

Ptrend = 0.75

  

Ptrend = 0.10

Weight gain (kg) – adjusted for current BMI h,i,k

            

 Stable j

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

  

1.17 0.83-1.65

  

1.07 0.64-1.80

  

1.17 0.54-2.56

  

1.38 0.71-2.67

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

  

1.14 0.79-1.65

  

1.00 0.58-1.70

  

1.00 0.45-2.24

  

1.92 0.89-4.15

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

  

1.17 0.77-1.78

  

1.22 0.66-2.25

  

0.76 0.32-1.85

  

1.94 0.75-5.03

 Gain, ≥30.0

  

1.41 0.88-2.26

  

1.12 0.55-2.27

  

0.99 0.39-2.49

  

4.70 1.48-14.97

   

Ptrend = 0.24

  

Ptrend = 0.67

  

Ptrend = 0.68

  

Ptrend = 0.02

ER+PR+ breast cancer

Cases (n = 415)

Controls (n = 1,336)

OR b 95% CI

Cases (n = 191)

Controls (n = 709)

OR c 95% CI

Cases (n = 108)

Controls (n = 315)

OR c 95% CI

Cases (n = 116)

Controls (n = 312)

OR c 95% CI

Current BMI (kg/m2) d

            

 <25.0

98

329

1.0

34

119

1.0

19

70

1.0

45

140

1.0

 25.0-29.9

141

476

1.09 0.80-1.49

60

273

0.90 0.54-1.49

44

106

1.76 0.89-3.47

37

97

1.06 0.61-1.85

 ≥30.0

175

523

1.30 0.95-1.78

96

312

1.23 0.75-2.01

45

137

1.46 0.74-2.89

34

74

1.39 0.76-2.55

   

Ptrend = 0.09

  

Ptrend = 0.22

  

Ptrend = 0.40

  

Ptrend = 0.30

Current BMI (kg/m2) – adjusted for weight gain d,e

            

 <25.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 25.0-29.9

  

1.06 0.73-1.54

  

1.01 0.56-1.84

  

1.77 0.78-4.06

  

0.74 0.35-1.56

 ≥30.0

  

1.01 0.64-1.60

  

1.17 0.58-2.35

  

1.29 0.48-3.48

  

0.64 0.23-1.76

   

Ptrend = 0.99

  

Ptrend = 0.62

  

Ptrend = 0.78

  

Ptrend = 0.37

Young-adult BMI (kg/m2) f,g

            

 T1: ≤21.2

147

402

1.0

51

161

1.0

45

122

1.0

51

119

1.0

 T2: 21.3-23.7

133

411

0.87 0.65-1.15

58

209

0.87 0.55-1.37

35

90

1.23 0.69-2.20

40

112

0.66 0.38-1.15

 T3: >23.7

116

445

0.73 0.54-0.98

65

272

0.80 0.51-1.25

28

98

0.73 0.39-1.36

23

75

0.52 0.27-1.00

   

Ptrend = 0.04

  

Ptrend = 0.33

  

Ptrend = 0.39

  

Ptrend = 0.04

Weight gain (kg) h,l

            

 Stable j

44

140

1.0

18

65

1.0

9

26

1.0

17

49

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

79

291

0.94 0.61-1.46

32

149

0.80 0.41-1.58

20

55

1.11 0.40-3.14

27

87

1.02 0.48-2.18

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

114

376

1.07 0.71-1.62

55

217

1.00 0.53-1.88

26

80

0.96 0.36-2.57

33

79

1.48 0.70-3.15

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

77

247

1.12 0.72-1.74

34

125

1.02 0.52-2.03

25

72

1.19 0.44-3.18

18

50

1.29 0.55-3.04

 Gain, ≥30.0

67

154

1.53 0.96-2.45

29

67

1.43 0.70-2.94

24

64

1.27 0.47-3.42

14

23

2.56 0.95-6.88

   

Ptrend = 0.04

  

Ptrend = 0.16

  

Ptrend = 0.58

  

Ptrend = 0.07

Weight gain (kg) – adjusted for current BMI h,k,l

            

 Stable j

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

  

0.93 0.60-1.44

  

0.81 0.41-1.59

  

0.92 0.31-2.67

  

1.09 0.50-2.38

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

  

1.04 0.66-1.65

  

0.96 0.49-1.89

  

0.67 0.22-2.04

  

1.90 0.77-4.73

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

  

1.10 0.65-1.86

  

0.93 0.43-2.05

  

0.85 0.26-2.77

  

1.80 0.58-5.63

 Gain, ≥30.0

  

1.53 0.85-2.73

  

1.29 0.55-3.01

  

1.02 0.29-3.58

  

3.82 0.99-14.71

Ptrend = 0.13

Ptrend = 0.48

Ptrend = 0.90

Ptrend = 0.06

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; ER+, estrogen receptor–positive; OR, odds ratio; PR+, progesterone receptor–positive.

a All P values for interaction by race/ethnicity were >0.05.

b Adjusted for age (years, continuous), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, African American, Hispanic), place of birth (U.S.-born, foreign-born), education (some high school or less, high school or vocational/technical school graduate, some college, college graduate), first-degree family history of breast cancer (no, yes), personal history of biopsy-confirmed benign breast disease (no, yes), age at menarche (≤11, 12, 13, ≥14 years), number of full-term pregnancies (nulliparous, 1, 2, 3, ≥4), age at first full-term pregnancy (nulliparous, ≤19, 20–24, 25–29, ≥30 years), lifetime breast-feeding (nulliparous, 0, ≤6, 7–12, 13–24, ≥25 months), lifetime physical activity (quartiles, hours/week), alcohol consumption in reference year (0, 0.1-4.9, 5–9.9, 10–19.9, ≥20 g/day), and total caloric intake (quartiles, kcal/day).

c Not adjusted for race/ethnicity.

d Based on self-reported weight and measured height at interview (if not available, then based on measured weight at interview and/or self-reported height).

e Adjusted for above variables, and weight gain.

f Based on tertiles among all postmenopausal controls.

g Based on self-reported young-adult weight and measured height at interview (or self-reported adult height when measured height not available).

h Self-reported weight (or measured weight at interview if self-reported weight not available) minus self-reported young-adult weight.

i Excludes 34 cases and 55 controls who lost >3 kg of weight.

j Stable weight defined as +/- 3 kg.

k Adjusted for above variables, and current BMI.

l Excludes 15 ER+PR+ cases and 55 controls who lost >3 kg of weight.

Young-adult BMI was an important modifying factor (Table 4). For ER+PR+ BC, associations with high BMI (OR = 1.97, Ptrend = 0.01) and high weight gain (OR = 1.71, Ptrend = 0.03) were limited to women with a young-adult BMI ≤22.4 kg/m2. No increased risks were found among women with both high young-adult BMI and high current BMI. Associations were also influenced by time since menopause. High weight gain was associated with two-fold increased risks of BC overall (OR = 2.71, 95% CI:1.29-5.69, Ptrend = 0.01) and ER+PR+ BC (OR = 2.47, 95% CI:1.03-5.94, Ptrend = 0.03) only in women who had experienced menopause ≥15 years ago. Similarly, the inverse association of young-adult BMI with BC risk overall was seen only in women with ≥15 years since menopause (>23.7 vs. ≤21.2 kg/m2: OR = 0.59, 95% CI:0.41-0.85, Ptrend < 0.01).
Table 4

BMI and weight gain and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women not currently using hormone therapy by young-adult BMI and time since menopause

 

Young-adult BMI

Young-adult BMI

 

≤22.4 kg/m2

>22.4 kg/m2

All breast cancer

Cases (n = 413)

Controls (n = 614)

OR a 95% CI

Cases (n = 348)

Controls (n = 644)

OR a 95% CI

P interaction

Current BMI (kg/m2) b

      

0.01

 <25.0

167

243

1.0

38

77

1.0

 25.0-29.9

131

232

0.77 0.56-1.06

136

217

1.28 0.80-2.05

 ≥30.0

115

138

1.22 0.86-1.74

174

350

0.92 0.58-1.45

Ptrend = 0.42

Ptrend = 0.19

Weight gain (kg) c,d

      

0.12

 Stable e

35

52

1.0

43

87

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

106

142

1.20 0.71-2.03

74

148

1.03 0.64-1.66

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

109

198

0.82 0.49-1.38

108

176

1.26 0.80-1.99

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

90

126

1.11 0.65-1.91

51

120

0.81 0.48-1.36

 Gain, ≥30.0

67

84

1.14 0.64-2.05

44

69

1.08 0.62-1.90

 
   

Ptrend = 0.84

  

Ptrend = 0.81

 

ER+PR+ breast cancer

Cases (n = 209)

Controls (n = 614)

OR a 95% CI

Cases (n = 187)

Controls (n = 644)

OR a 95% CI

P interaction

Current BMI (kg/m2) b

      

0.01

 <25.0

77

243

1.0

19

77

1.0

 25.0-29.9

63

232

0.87 0.57-1.32

74

217

1.42 0.78-2.59

 ≥30.0

69

138

1.97 1.26-3.09

94

350

1.10 0.61-1.98

Ptrend = 0.01

Ptrend = 0.69

Weight gain (kg) c,f

      

0.08

Stable e

20

52

1.0

24

87

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

42

142

0.97 0.50-1.88

37

148

0.99 0.54-1.80

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

52

198

0.83 0.43-1.59

62

176

1.44 0.82-2.54

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

50

126

1.35 0.69-2.64

27

120

0.88 0.46-1.69

 Gain, ≥30.0

41

84

1.71 0.83-3.52

26

69

1.48 0.75-2.94

 
   

Ptrend = 0.03

  

Ptrend = 0.42

 
 

<15 Years Since Menopause g

≥15 Years Since Menopause g

 

All breast cancer

Cases (n = 335)

Controls (n = 552)

OR a 95% CI

Cases (n = 352)

Controls (n = 576)

OR a 95% CI

P interaction

Current BMI (kg/m2) b

      

0.09

 <25.0

98

134

1.0

82

138

1.0

 25.0-29.9

115

187

0.85 0.57-1.26

126

229

0.97 0.67-1.41

 ≥30.0

120

227

0.70 0.47-1.03

143

205

1.24 0.84-1.81

Ptrend = 0.07

Ptrend = 0.22

Current BMI (kg/m2) –adjusted for weight gain b,h

      

0.31

 <25.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 25.0-29.9

0.89 0.56-1.42

0.73 0.46-1.15

 ≥30.0

0.85 0.47-1.51

0.68 0.39-1.18

Ptrend = 0.58

Ptrend = 0.20

Young-adult BMI (kg/m2) i,j

      

0.57

 T1: ≤21.2

120

181

1.0

127

163

1.0

 T2: 21.3-23.7

112

163

1.03 0.72-1.48

112

174

0.82 0.58-1.16

 T3: >23.7

90

181

0.78 0.53-1.14

92

199

0.59 0.41-0.85

Ptrend = 0.22

Ptrend < 0.01

Weight gain (kg) c,k

      

0.12

 Stable e

33

55

1.0

32

68

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

85

116

1.13 0.65-1.96

72

133

1.29 0.76-2.20

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

101

165

0.89 0.53-1.52

92

152

1.40 0.83-2.35

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

52

98

0.82 0.46-1.48

66

105

1.44 0.83-2.50

 Gain, ≥30.0

40

73

0.69 0.37-1.30

53

55

2.09 1.15-3.81

Ptrend = 0.08

Ptrend = 0.02

Weight gain (kg) – adjusted for current BMI c,k,l

      

0.12

 Stable e

  

1.0

  

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

  

1.16 0.67-2.01

  

1.34 0.78-2.30

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

  

0.96 0.54-1.71

  

1.67 0.93-2.99

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

  

0.91 0.46-1.82

  

1.77 0.92-3.38

 Gain, ≥30.0

  

0.78 0.36-1.68

  

2.71 1.29-5.69

 
   

Ptrend = 0.40

  

Ptrend = 0.01

 

ER+PR+ breast cancer

Cases (n = 156)

Controls (n = 552)

OR a 95% CI

Cases (n = 201)

Controls (n = 576)

OR a 95% CI

P interaction

Current BMI (kg/m2) b

      

0.45

 <25.0

42

134

1.0

40

138

1.0

 25.0-29.9

47

187

0.89 0.53-1.50

77

229

1.26 0.79-2.02

 ≥30.0

66

227

1.07 0.64-1.78

84

205

1.63 1.00-2.65

Ptrend = 0.71

Ptrend = 0.05

Current BMI (kg/m2) –adjusted for weight gain b,h

      

0.43

 <25.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 25.0-29.9

  

0.97 0.52-1.81

  

1.15 0.64-2.07

 ≥30.0

  

1.35 0.63-2.87

  

0.94 0.46-1.92

Ptrend = 0.40

Ptrend = 0.75

Young-adult BMI (kg/m2) i,j

      

0.76

 T1: ≤21.2

56

181

1.0

67

163

1.0

 T2: 21.3-23.7

49

163

1.00 0.62-1.59

66

174

0.89 0.58-1.37

 T3: >23.7

45

181

0.89 0.54-1.46

58

199

0.70 0.45-1.10

Ptrend = 0.64

Ptrend = 0.12

Weight gain (kg) c,m

      

0.51

 Stable e

16

55

1.0

22

68

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

34

116

0.94 0.46-1.93

34

133

0.93 0.48-1.77

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

48

165

0.98 0.49-1.94

53

152

1.25 0.68-2.30

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

24

98

0.85 0.40-1.84

40

105

1.38 0.72-2.64

 Gain, ≥30.0

24

73

0.99 0.45-2.17

33

55

2.32 1.15-4.69

Ptrend = 0.91

Ptrend = 0.01

Weight gain (kg) – adjusted for current BMI c,l,m

      

0.48

 Stable e

  

1.0

  

1.0

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

  

0.95 0.46-1.95

  

0.86 0.44-1.68

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

  

0.94 0.44-1.97

  

1.17 0.59-2.33

 Gain, 20.0-29.9

  

0.70 0.28-1.73

  

1.39 0.64-3.01

 Gain, ≥30.0

  

0.76 0.29-1.99

  

2.47 1.03-5.94

Ptrend = 0.50

Ptrend = 0.03

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; ER+, estrogen receptor–positive; OR, odds ratio; PR+, progesterone receptor–positive.

a Adjusted for age (years, continuous), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, African American, Hispanic), place of birth (U.S.-born, foreign-born), education (some high school or less, high school or vocational/technical school graduate, some college, college graduate), family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives (no, yes), personal history of biopsy-confirmed benign breast disease (no, yes), age at menarche (≤11, 12, 13, ≥14 years), number of full-term pregnancies (nulliparous, 1, 2, 3, ≥4), age at first full-term pregnancy (nulliparous, ≤19, 20–24, 25–29, ≥30 years), lifetime breast-feeding (nulliparous, 0, ≤6, 7–12, 13–24, ≥25 months), lifetime physical activity (quartiles, hours/week), alcohol consumption in reference year (0, 0.1-4.9, 5–9.9, 10–19.9, ≥20 g/day), and total caloric intake (quartiles, kcal/day).

b Based on self-reported weight and measured height at interview (if not available, then based on measured weight at interview and/or self-reported height).

c Self-reported weight (or measured weight at interview if self-reported weight not available) minus self-reported young-adult weight.

d Excludes 34 cases and 55 controls who lost >3 kg of weight.

e Stable weight defined as +/- 3 kg.

f Excludes 15 ER+PR+ cases and 55 controls who lost >3 kg of weight.

g Among women with natural or surgical menopause only.

h Adjusted for above variables, and weight gain.

i Based on tertiles among all postmenopausal controls.

j Based on self-reported young-adult weight and measured height at interview (or self-reported adult height when measured height not available).

k Excludes 28 cases and 46 controls who lost >3 kg of weight.

l Adjusted for above variables, and current BMI.

m Excludes 13 ER+PR+ cases and 46 controls who lost >3 kg of weight.

Waist circumference was associated with ER+PR+ BC in Hispanics (Ptrend = 0.01) and AAs (Ptrend = 0.05) only, with two- to three-fold increased ORs for large waist size that were independent of current BMI (Table 5). Associations were slightly stronger for ER+PR+ disease than BC overall. Large hip circumference was associated with elevated ORs in Hispanics and NHWs, with a significant trend in Hispanics (Ptrend = 0.01). There was no association with WHR (data not shown). High WHtR was associated with elevated ORs in Hispanics and AAs, with a significant trend in Hispanics (Ptrend = 0.01). For waist and hip circumferences and WHtR, associations did not vary by time since menopause (data not shown). Considering the joint effects of abdominal adiposity and overall adiposity (Table 6), we found that large waist circumference was associated with increased BC risk only in women with a BMI <25 kg/m2. A similar pattern was seen for WHtR. For ER+PR+ disease, ORs were elevated, regardless of BMI, but significant only in women with a BMI ≥25 kg/m2.
Table 5

Abdominal adiposity and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women not currently using hormone therapy by race/ethnicity a

 

All race/ethnicities

Hispanics

African Americans

Non-Hispanic Whites

All breast cancer

Cases (n = 801)

Controls (n = 1,336)

OR b 95% CI

Cases (n = 377)

Controls (n = 709)

OR c 95% CI

Cases (n = 243)

Controls (n = 315)

OR c 95% CI

Cases (n = 181)

Controls (n = 312)

OR c 95% CI

Waist (cm) d

            

 T1: ≤ 85.0

198

385

1.0

96

201

1.0

30

54

1.0

72

130

1.0

 T2: 85.1-96.4

214

407

0.99 0.77-1.27

113

245

0.90 0.63-1.27

59

78

1.55 0.85-2.83

42

84

0.91 0.55-1.52

 T3: >96.4

293

412

1.32 1.03-1.69

146

232

1.27 0.90-1.79

102

120

1.83 1.04-3.21

45

60

1.24 0.72-2.13

   

Ptrend = 0.02

  

Ptrend = 0.14

  

Ptrend = 0.05

  

Ptrend = 0.52

Waist (cm) – adjusted for current BMI d,e

            

 T1: ≤ 85.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 T2: 85.1-96.4

  

1.09 0.82-1.44

  

1.08 0.73-1.60

  

1.64 0.84-3.20

  

0.80 0.44-1.47

 T3: >96.4

  

1.59 1.15-2.19

  

1.79 1.14-2.81

  

2.17 1.05-4.49

  

0.90 0.42-1.91

   

Ptrend < 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.04

  

Ptrend = 0.75

Hip (cm) d

            

 T1: ≤ 102.9

194

394

1.0

105

224

1.0

39

60

1.0

50

110

1.0

 T2: 103.0-112.7

230

402

1.15 0.90-1.47

119

229

1.13 0.80-1.58

54

77

1.06 0.60-1.88

57

96

1.46 0.87-2.43

 T3: >112.7

281

407

1.36 1.07-1.73

131

224

1.22 0.87-1.71

98

115

1.51 0.89-2.56

52

68

1.80 1.03-3.14

   

Ptrend = 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.26

  

Ptrend = 0.09

  

Ptrend = 0.04

Hip (cm) – adjusted for current BMI d,e

            

 T1: ≤ 102.9

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 T2: 103.0-112.7

  

1.27 0.97-1.66

  

1.34 0.92-1.94

  

1.04 0.54-2.00

  

1.58 0.90-2.79

 T3: >112.7

  

1.66 1.20-2.30

  

1.64 1.05-2.58

  

1.68 0.82-3.42

  

1.88 0.86-4.10

   

Ptrend < 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.03

  

Ptrend = 0.10

  

Ptrend = 0.09

Waist-to-height ratio d

            

 T1: ≤ 0.54

200

372

1.0

80

153

1.0

42

70

1.0

78

149

1.0

 T2: 0.55-0.61

226

410

1.05 0.81-1.35

117

254

0.88 0.61-1.28

64

85

1.42 0.82-2.45

45

71

1.27 0.76-2.12

 T3: >0.61

279

422

1.27 0.98-1.64

158

271

1.13 0.78-1.62

85

97

1.74 1.02-2.96

36

54

1.16 0.65-2.06

   

Ptrend = 0.06

  

Ptrend = 0.37

  

Ptrend = 0.05

  

Ptrend = 0.51

Waist-to-height ratio – adjusted for current BMI d,e

            

 T1: ≤ 0.54

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 T2: 0.55-0.61

  

1.14 0.86-1.52

  

1.05 0.69-1.60

  

1.55 0.82-2.91

  

1.13 0.61-2.09

 T3: >0.61

  

1.49 1.06-2.09

  

1.55 0.96-2.50

  

2.22 1.09-4.51

  

0.85 0.39-1.84

   

Ptrend = 0.02

  

Ptrend = 0.05

  

Ptrend = 0.03

  

Ptrend = 0.72

ER+PR+ breast cancer

Cases (n = 415)

Controls (n = 1,336)

OR b 95% CI

Cases (n = 191)

Controls (n = 709)

OR c 95% CI

Cases (n = 108)

Controls (n = 315)

OR c 95% CI

Cases (n = 116)

Controls (n = 312)

OR c 95% CI

Waist (cm) d

            

 T1: ≤ 85.0

95

385

1.0

42

201

1.0

8

54

1.0

45

130

1.0

 T2: 85.1-96.4

106

407

1.11 0.80-1.54

55

245

1.01 0.63-1.61

26

78

2.70 1.01-7.17

25

84

0.88 0.48-1.63

 T3: >96.4

162

412

1.76 1.28-2.41

84

232

1.79 1.14-2.81

46

120

3.31 1.29-8.48

32

60

1.38 0.75-2.56

   

Ptrend < 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.02

  

Ptrend = 0.33

Waist (cm) – adjusted for current BMI d,e

            

 T1: ≤ 85.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 T2: 85.1-96.4

  

1.13 0.78-1.63

  

1.12 0.66-1.90

  

2.48 0.86-7.19

  

0.75 0.37-1.52

 T3: >96.4

  

1.83 1.21-2.79

  

2.03 1.11-3.70

  

3.36 1.10-10.28

  

0.98 0.41-2.32

   

Ptrend < 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.05

  

Ptrend = 0.93

Hip (cm) d

            

 T1: ≤ 102.9

92

394

1.0

46

224

1.0

17

60

1.0

29

110

1.0

 T2: 103.0-112.7

118

402

1.32 0.96-1.81

56

229

1.23 0.78-1.94

23

77

1.04 0.48-2.28

39

96

1.76 0.95-3.25

 T3: >112.7

153

407

1.77 1.30-2.42

79

224

1.85 1.19-2.85

40

115

1.54 0.74-3.21

34

68

2.06 1.07-3.97

   

Ptrend < 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.20

  

Ptrend = 0.03

Hip (cm) – adjusted for current BMI d,e

            

 T1: ≤ 102.9

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 T2: 103.0-112.7

  

1.36 0.96-1.93

  

1.38 0.83-2.28

  

0.77 0.31-1.88

  

1.81 0.92-3.56

 T3: >112.7

  

1.85 1.22-2.81

  

2.12 1.17-3.84

  

1.18 0.45-3.08

  

1.96 0.78-4.91

   

Ptrend < 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.57

  

Ptrend = 0.12

Waist-to-height ratio d

            

 T1: ≤ 0.54

98

372

1.0

36

153

1.0

14

70

1.0

48

149

1.0

 T2: 0.55-0.61

112

410

1.15 0.83-1.59

51

254

0.88 0.53-1.46

30

85

1.94 0.86-4.35

31

71

1.44 0.79-2.65

 T3: >0.61

153

422

1.61 1.16-2.23

94

271

1.63 1.02-2.62

36

97

2.19 0.99-4.82

23

54

1.14 0.59-2.23

   

Ptrend < 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.01

  

Ptrend = 0.07

  

Ptrend = 0.49

Waist-to-height ratio –adjusted for current BMI d,e

            

 T1: ≤ 0.54

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

  

1.0

 T2: 0.55-0.61

  

1.13 0.77-1.64

  

0.97 0.55-1.73

  

1.75 0.72-4.26

  

1.19 0.58-2.48

 T3: >0.61

  

1.55 1.00-2.39

  

1.83 0.97-3.47

  

2.19 0.81-5.93

  

0.74 0.30-1.85

Ptrend = 0.04

Ptrend = 0.02

Ptrend = 0.14

Ptrend = 0.62

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; ER+, estrogen receptor–positive; OR, odds ratio; PR+, progesterone receptor–positive.

a All P values for interaction by race/ethnicity were >0.05.

b Adjusted for age (years, continuous), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, African American, Hispanic), place of birth (U.S.-born, foreign-born), education (some high school or less, high school or vocational/technical school graduate, some college, college graduate), first-degree family history of breast cancer (no, yes), personal history of biopsy-confirmed benign breast disease (no, yes), age at menarche (≤11, 12, 13, ≥14 years), number of full-term pregnancies (nulliparous, 1, 2, 3, ≥4), age at first full-term pregnancy (nulliparous, ≤19, 20–24, 25–29, ≥30 years), lifetime breast-feeding (nulliparous, 0, ≤6, 7–12, 13–24, ≥25 months), lifetime physical activity (quartiles, hours/week), alcohol consumption in reference year (0, 0.1-4.9, 5–9.9, 10–19.9, ≥20 g/day), and total caloric intake (quartiles, kcal/day).

c Adjusted for above variables, except race/ethnicity.

d Based on tertiles among all postmenopausal controls.

e Adjusted for above variables, and current BMI.

Table 6

Abdominal adiposity and breast cancer risk in postmenopausal women not currently using hormone therapy by current BMI

 

Current BMI < 25.0kg/m2

Current BMI ≥ 25.0kg/m2

 

All breast cancer

Cases (n=396)

Controls (n=648)

OR a 95% CI

Cases (n=402)

Controls (n=680)

OR a 95% CI

P interaction

Waist (cm) b

       

 M1: ≤ 90.5

151

272

1.00

140

321

0.87 0.65-1.18

0.25

 M2: > 90.5

27

26

1.90 1.05-3.44

387

585

1.21 0.93-1.57

 

Waist-to-height ratio b

       

 M1: ≤ 0.58

156

276

1.00

152

310

0.93 0.69-1.24

0.93

 M2: > 0.58

22

22

1.87 0.98-3.56

375

596

1.17 0.90-1.52

 

ER+PR+ breast cancer

Cases (n=194)

Controls (n=648)

OR a 95% CI

Cases (n=220)

Controls (n=680)

OR a 95% CI

P interaction

Waist (cm) b

       

 M1: ≤ 90.5

73

272

1.00

67

321

0.92 0.62-1.36

0.16

 M2: > 90.5

10

26

1.53 0.69-3.39

213

585

1.55 1.11-2.17

 

Waist-to-height ratio b

       

 M1: ≤ 0.58

75

276

1.00

75

310

1.02 0.70-1.50

0.47

 M2: > 0.58

8

22

1.53 0.63-3.68

205

596

1.52 1.08-2.12

 

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; ER+, estrogen receptor–positive; OR, odds ratio; PR+, progesterone receptor–positive.

a OR and 95% CI adjusted for age (years, continuous), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, African American, Hispanic), place of birth (US-born, foreign-born), education (some high school or less, high school or vocational/technical school graduate, some college, college graduate), family history of breast cancer in first-degree relatives (no, yes), personal history of biopsy-confirmed benign breast disease (no, yes), age at menarche (≤11, 12, 13, ≥14 years), number of full-term pregnancies (nulliparous, 1, 2, 3, ≥4), age at first full-term pregnancy (nulliparous, ≤19, 20–24, 25–29, ≥30 years), lifetime breast-feeding (nulliparous, 0, ≤6, 7–12, 13–24, ≥25 months), lifetime physical activity (quartiles, hours/week), alcohol consumption in reference year (0, 0.1-4.9, 5–9.9, 10–19.9, ≥20 g/day), and total caloric intake (quartiles, kcal/day).

b Based on median among all postmenopausal controls.

For ER-PR- BC, there were no associations with current BMI and weight gain, whereas a strong inverse association was found with young-adult BMI (>23.7 vs. ≤21.2 kg/m2: OR = 0.61, 95% CI:0.38-0.97, Ptrend = 0.04) (Table 7). Modest positive associations with waist and hip circumferences were strengthened after adjustment for current BMI (Ptrend = 0.07 and 0.01, respectively). Sample sizes of ER-PR- cases were too small for further stratification by race/ethnicity (9 NHWs, 48 AAs, 79 Hispanics).
Table 7

Body size and risk of ER-PR- breast cancer in postmenopausal women not currently using hormone therapy

 

Cases (n=135)

Controls (n=1,336)

ORa, 95% CI

ORb95% CI

ORc95% CI

Current BMI(kg/m2) d

     

 <25.0

34

329

1.00

 

1.00

 25.0-29.9

46

476

0.75 0.46-1.22

 

0.62 0.36-1.08

 ≥30.0

54

523

0.72 0.45-1.16

 

0.58 0.30-1.14

Ptrend = 0.21

Ptrend = 0.13

Young-adult BMI (kg/m2) e,f

     

 T1: ≤21.2

46

402

1.00

  

 T2: 21.3-23.7

43

411

0.82 0.52-1.29

  

 T3: >23.7

37

445

0.61 0.38-0.97

  

Ptrend = 0.04

Weight gain (kg) g

     

 Stable h

10

140

1.00

1.00

 

 Gain, 3.0-9.9

31

291

1.38 0.65-2.93

1.47 0.69-3.16

 

 Gain, 10.0-19.9

42

376

1.31 0.63-2.72

1.67 0.76-3.65

 

 Gain, ≥20.0

39

401

1.05 0.50-2.19

1.45 0.60-3.48

 

Ptrend = 0.63

Ptrend = 0.48

Waist (cm) e

     

 T1: ≤ 85.0

28

385

1.00

1.00

 

 T2: 85.1-96.4

40

407

1.13 0.67-1.89

1.43 0.80-5.54

 

 T3: >96.4

48

412

1.24 0.75-2.06

1.87 0.96-3.64

 

Ptrend = 0.41

Ptrend = 0.07

Hip (cm) e

     

 T1: ≤ 102.9

27

394

1.00

1.00

 

 T2: 103.0-112.7

41

402

1.40 0.84-2.34

1.85 1.05-3.28

 

 T3: >112.7

48

407

1.43 0.86-2.37

2.35 1.20-4.59

 

Ptrend = 0.19

Ptrend = 0.01

Waist-to-hip ratio

     

 T1: ≤ 0.81

33

434

1.00

1.00

 

 T2: 0.82-0.86

34

355

1.14 0.68-1.90

1.21 0.72-2.04

 

 T3: >0.86

49

413

1.35 0.83-2.18

1.46 0.88-2.39

 

Ptrend = 0.22

Ptrend = 0.14

Waist-to-height ratio

     

 T1: ≤ 0.54

30

372

1.00

1.00

 

 T2: 0.55-0.61

40

410

0.98 0.59-1.63

1.19 0.66-2.17

 

 T3: >0.61

46

422

1.05 0.63-1.73

1.44 0.72-2.87

 

Ptrend = 0.84

Ptrend = 0.30

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; CI, confidence interval; ER-, estrogen receptor–negative; OR, odds ratio; PR-, progesterone receptor–negative.

a OR and 95% CI adjusted for age (years, continuous), race/ethnicity (non-Hispanic White, African American, Hispanic), place of birth (US-born, foreign-born), age at menarche (≤11, 12, 13, ≥14 years), and lifetime breast-feeding (nulliparous, 0, ≤6, 7–12, 13–24, ≥25 months).

b Adjusted for above variables, and current BMI.

c Adjusted for above variables, and weight gain.

d Based on self-reported weight and measured height at interview (if not available, then based on measured weight at interview and/or self-reported height).

e Based on tertiles among all postmenopausal controls.

f Based on self-reported young-adult weight and measured height at interview (or self-reported adult height when measured height not available).

g Self-reported weight (or measured weight at interview if self-reported weight not available) minus self-reported young-adult weight; excludes 5 cases and 55 controls who lost >3 kg of weight

h Stable weight defined as +/- 3 kg.

Among women currently using HT (289 cases, 498 controls), there was no evidence of significant associations between any of the body size measures examined and BC risk overall or ER+PR+ disease (data not shown).

Discussion

In postmenopausal women not currently using HT, weight gain was positively associated with risk of ER+PR+ BC and was a stronger predictor of risk than current BMI. The highest elevations in risks were found in subgroups of women with a low young-adult BMI or ≥15 years since menopause. Young-adult obesity was associated with reduced BC risk. High waist circumference and WHtR were associated with increased BC risk, independent of current BMI. Associations with weight gain and young-adult BMI were stronger for NHWs than Hispanics and AAs, whereas associations with waist and WHtR were present only in Hispanic and AA women.

Consistent with other reports (White et al. 2012; Huang et al. 1997; Ahn et al. 2007; Feigelson et al. 2004), we found that weight gain was an important risk factor for postmenopausal BC, independent of current BMI. For current BMI no association remained after adjustment for weight gain. In agreement with other studies (Vrieling et al. 2010), we found that the relation with weight gain was limited to ER+PR+ BC. Risk was increased two-fold for currently obese women (BMI ≥30 kg/m2) who had a young-adult BMI <22.4 kg/m2, which is in agreement with other studies (Ahn et al. 2007; Canchola et al. 2012). We found modest effect modification by young adult BMI for weight gain, though some other studies did not (Barnes-Josiah et al. 1995; Feigelson et al. 2004; van den Brandt et al. 1997; Lahmann et al. 2005). In contrast, BC risk was not increased in women who were obese throughout their adult life, consistent with other (Ahn et al. 2007; Canchola et al. 2012), but not all reports (Barnes-Josiah et al. 1995). In agreement with other reports (Chu et al. 1991; Magnusson et al. 1998; Macinnis et al. 2004), we found time since menopause to be another important modifying factor, with two-fold increased risks of ER+PR+ BC with weight gain only among women with ≥15 years since menopause. Weight gain during adulthood largely reflects an increase in body fat which serves as an important source of estrogen production in postmenopausal women (Siiteri 1987). The role of an estrogen-related pathway is further supported by the observation that the associations with BMI and weight gain are limited to ER+PR+ tumors (Suzuki et al. 2009; Vrieling et al. 2010).

Prior findings in AA and Hispanic women for BMI are inconsistent. In our study, OR estimates were increased only for ER+PR+ disease and were of similar magnitude in the three racial/ethnic groups. Two studies in AAs reported elevated risks of ER+PR+ disease (Palmer et al. 2007; Berstad et al. 2010), and, similar to our study, there was no evidence of an association with BMI for BC overall. Other studies did not consider hormone receptor status (White et al. 2012; Schatzkin et al. 1987; Adams-Campbell et al. 1996; Hall et al. 2000; Zhu et al. 2005), and not all found a positive association with BMI (White et al. 2012; Schatzkin et al. 1987; Zhu et al. 2005). In black women from Nigeria (Ogundiran et al. 2010; Okobia et al. 2006; Adebamowo et al. 2003) and Barbados (Nemesure et al. 2009), no associations with BMI were found. In Hispanic women, BMI was not associated with BC overall (Wenten et al. 2002; Slattery et al. 2007; White et al. 2012) and ER+ disease (Slattery et al. 2007), even among women not using HT (Slattery et al. 2007; White et al. 2012).

We found that high weight gain was associated with a two-fold increased risk of ER+PR+ BC in NHW women. In AAs and Hispanics, the associations were much weaker, likely due to the higher prevalence of young-adult obesity in these groups. Of three studies in AAs that reported on weight gain and BC risk (White et al. 2012; Zhu et al. 2005; Palmer et al. 2007), only one found a significant association with BC risk overall (White et al. 2012). In Hispanic women from New Mexico, large weight gain was associated with a two-fold increased risk of ER+PR+ disease and, for BC overall, a significant trend with weight gain was limited to women with a BMI <22 kg/m2 at age 18 years (Wenten et al. 2002). Two other studies in Hispanics found no association with weight gain (Slattery et al. 2007; White et al. 2012). In order to address these inconsistent findings with BMI and weight gain for AA and Hispanic women, future studies should examine the modifying effect of young-adult obesity with larger sample sizes. This is particularly important since AA and Hispanic women have a higher prevalence of young-adult obesity than NHWs, as found in our study as well as others (Flegal et al. 2010).

Our finding of a strong inverse association of postmenopausal BC risk with high young-adult BMI, which was independent of weight change or current BMI, is consistent with other reports (White et al. 2012; Palmer et al. 2007; Berstad et al. 2010; Barnes-Josiah et al. 1995; Huang et al. 1997; Morimoto et al. 2002; Ahn et al. 2007; Chu et al. 1991; Brinton & Swanson 1992; Magnusson et al. 1998), although in some studies there was no association with young-adult BMI (Canchola et al. 2012; Feigelson et al. 2004; Lahmann et al. 2005). In agreement with a large meta-analysis (Suzuki et al. 2009), we found that the inverse association with young-adult BMI did not differ by tumor hormone receptor status. We further found an inverse association, regardless of HT use, as reported by others (Morimoto et al. 2002; Ahn et al. 2007). These findings do not support an estrogen-related mechanism underlying the association with young-adult BMI.

Abdominal adiposity has been proposed to be more important in estrogen production than adiposity at other body sites (Pinheiro et al. 2009). Studies in primarily NHW women, however, have produced inconsistent results (World Cancer Research Fund / American Institute for Cancer Research 2007). Not all studies considered HT use or ER/PR status, or adjusted for overall adiposity (Canchola et al. 2012; Potter et al. 1995; Huang et al. 2000). Our findings confirm previous reports of positive associations with waist circumference and WHtR only in women not currently using HT (Morimoto et al. 2002; Huang et al. 1999; Friedenreich et al. 2002) and stronger associations for ER+PR+ disease (Canchola et al. 2012; Potter et al. 1995; Huang et al. 2000). We found no association with WHR, whereas elevated WHtR was associated with increased risk, in agreement with another study (Canchola et al. 2012). Both waist circumference and WHtR may be better measures of abdominal adiposity than WHR (Molarius & Seidell 1998; Rankinen et al. 1999). In some studies, the association with abdominal adiposity was attenuated after adjustment for BMI (Morimoto et al. 2002; Lahmann et al. 2004; Tehard & Clavel-Chapelon 2006), whereas in our study associations became stronger after BMI-adjustment. Among women with BMI <25 kg/m2, large waist circumference and high WHtR were associated with two-fold increased risks of BC overall. Contrary to another study that reported an association between abdominal adiposity and ER+PR+ tumors only in normal-weight women (Canchola et al. 2012), we found elevated ORs for ER+PR+ tumors, regardless of BMI, with statistically significant estimates in overweight/obese women.

Unlike NHW women, for whom we found no associations with waist circumference and WHtR, AAs and Hispanics had two- to three-fold increased risk of ER+PR+ BC. We found no association with WHR in any racial/ethnic group. This latter finding is consistent with two studies in AA women (Hall et al. 2000; Palmer et al. 2007), but contrasts with reports from Nigeria (Ogundiran et al. 2010) and Barbados (Nemesure et al. 2009), where large waist circumference and high WHR increased BC risk. Similarly, the two-fold increased risk of ER+PR+ disease associated with large hip circumference that we observed for NHW and Hispanic women was not seen in AAs, whereas previous studies from Nigeria (Ogundiran et al. 2012) and Barbados (Nemesure et al. 2009) reported inverse associations with hip circumference. In the Nigerian study, associations with abdominal adiposity were stronger or limited to women with a BMI <25 kg/m2 (Ogundiran et al. 2012), consistent with our findings. In the only study that examined abdominal adiposity in postmenopausal Hispanic women, hip circumference and WHR were not associated with BC risk in not recent HT users (Slattery et al. 2007), which differs from our finding. Given these conflicting reports, it remains to be determined whether there are true racial/ethnic differences in the effects of abdominal adiposity on BC risk. Abdominal fat comprises different fat stores, and AAs and NHWs differ in abdominal depot-specific body fat (e.g., visceral vs. subcutaneous adipose tissue) (Katzmarzyk et al. 2010). Whether different fat stores affect BC risk differentially has not been examined. Our results suggest that studies should assess multiple measures of adiposity in racially/ethnically diverse populations.

Our analyses of body size and ER-PR- BC risk were limited by small numbers. Consistent with most other studies (Suzuki et al. 2009; Yang et al. 2011), we found no associations with current BMI and weight gain, although there are some reports of inverse (Berstad et al. 2010; Setiawan et al. 2009) or positive associations with BMI (Ritte et al. 2012) and positive associations with weight gain (Canchola et al. 2012). Unlike other studies (Canchola et al. 2012; Potter et al. 1995), we found a strong inverse association with young-adult BMI and ER-PR- disease. Adjustment for BMI strengthened the positive association between waist (Ptrend = 0.07) and hip (Ptrend = 0.01) circumferences and risk of ER-PR- BC, but, consistent with other studies (Canchola et al. 2012; Potter et al. 1995; Huang et al. 2000), we found no significant association with WHR or WHtR. The association between BMI, weight gain, and abdominal adiposity warrants further examination in studies with larger numbers of ER-PR- cases. This is particularly important since few risk factors have been identified for hormone receptor negative BC (Althuis et al. 2004; Ma et al. 2006), which disproportionately affects AA and Hispanic women (Ray & Polite 2010).

Our findings should be considered in light of some limitations. Due to the concern that weight may be impacted by BC diagnosis and treatment, we relied on self-reported weight during the reference year. Although we cannot exclude the possibility of inaccurately recalled weight, among subjects for whom measured and self-reported weight was available, the correlation between the two measures was high (r = 0.85 for cases, r = 0.92 for controls). For waist and hip circumference we had to rely on measurements taken after diagnosis which may have also resulted in misclassification. Finally, some subgroup analyses were limited by small sample sizes, and analyses of potential modifying factors (young-adult BMI, time since menopause) could not be further stratified by race/ethnicity. Larger studies or analyses of pooled data will be necessary to further explore the role of these modifying factors in Hispanics and AAs.

Our study also has several important strengths, including a population-based design, high participation rates among cases and controls in each racial/ethnic group, assessment of both overall and abdominal adiposity, detailed data on established BC risk factors, and availability of data on tumor hormone receptor status for most cases. The racial/ethnic diversity of the study population allowed us to assess associations with body size in Hispanic and AA women, thus contributing to the relatively sparse data in these two racial/ethnic populations that experience a greater burden of obesity than NHWs.

It has been estimated that as many as one third of new postmenopausal BC cases may be attributable to adult weight gain (Huang et al. 1997). Given that a number of BC risk factors relate to events well before menopause (e.g., age at menarche, age at first birth) or characteristics that cannot easily be modified (e.g., BC family history), observed associations with body size suggest possible approaches to lowering BC risk in older women through weight maintenance, avoidance of further weight gain and abdominal adiposity, or weight loss. However, promoting overweight at a young age, as a means of reducing BC risk after menopause, should not be encouraged, given the many adverse health effects associated with obesity, including other cancers (Calle & Kaaks 2004; Chen et al. 2011).

Abbreviations

AA: 

African American

BC: 

Breast cancer

BMI: 

Body mass index

CI: 

Confidence interval

ER: 

Estrogen receptor

HT: 

Hormone therapy

OR: 

Odds ratio

NHW: 

non-Hispanic white

PR: 

Progesterone receptor

WHR: 

Waist-to-hip ratio

WHtR: 

Waist-to-height ratio.

Declarations

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute (grant R03 CA121875). Data collection for the parent study was funded by National Cancer Institute (grants R01 CA63446 and R01 CA77305); the U.S. Department of Defense (grant DAMD17-96-1-6071); and the California Breast Cancer Research Program (grants 4JB-1106 and 7PB-0068). The collection of cancer incidence data used in this study was supported by the California Department of Public Health as part of the statewide cancer reporting program mandated by California Health and Safety Code Section 103885; the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program under contract HHSN261201000140C awarded to the Cancer Prevention Institute of California, contract HHSN261201000035C awarded to the University of Southern California, and contract HHSN261201000034C awarded to the Public Health Institute; and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Program of Cancer Registries, under agreement U58DP003862-01 awarded to the California Department of Public Health. The ideas and opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and endorsement by the State of California, Department of Public Health the National Cancer Institute, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or their Contractors and Subcontractors is not intended nor should be inferred.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Cancer Prevention Institute of California
(2)
Division of Epidemiology, Department of Health Research and Policy, and Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine
(3)
Division of Public Health Sciences, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center

References

  1. Adams-Campbell LL, Kim KS, Dunston G, et al.: The relationship of body mass index to reproductive factors in pre- and postmenopausal African-American women with and without breast cancer. Obes Res 1996, 4(5):451-456. 10.1002/j.1550-8528.1996.tb00253.xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Adebamowo CA, Ogundiran TO, Adenipekun AA, et al.: Obesity and height in urban Nigerian women with breast cancer. Ann Epidemiol 2003, 13(6):455-461. 10.1016/S1047-2797(02)00426-XView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Ahn J, Schatzkin A, Lacey JV Jr, et al.: Adiposity, adult weight change, and postmenopausal breast cancer risk. Arch Intern Med 2007, 167(19):2091-2102. 10.1001/archinte.167.19.2091View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Althuis MD, Fergenbaum JH, Garcia-Closas M, et al.: Etiology of hormone receptor-defined breast cancer: a systematic review of the literature. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004, 13(10):1558-1568.Google Scholar
  5. Austin H, Cole P, Wynder E: Breast cancer in black American women. Int J Cancer 1979, 24(5):541-544. 10.1002/ijc.2910240504View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Barnes-Josiah D, Potter JD, Sellers TA, et al.: Early body size and subsequent weight gain as predictors of breast cancer incidence (Iowa, United States). Cancer Causes Control 1995, 6(2):112-118. 10.1007/BF00052771View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Berstad P, Coates RJ, Bernstein L, et al.: A case–control study of body mass index and breast cancer risk in white and African-American women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010, 19(6):1532-1544. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0025View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Block G, Hartman AM, Dresser CM, et al.: A data-based approach to diet questionnaire design and testing. Am J Epidemiol 1986, 124(3):453-469.Google Scholar
  9. Brinton LA, Swanson CA: Height and weight at various ages and risk of breast cancer. Ann Epidemiol 1992, 2(5):597-609. 10.1016/1047-2797(92)90004-AView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Calle EE, Kaaks R: Overweight, obesity and cancer: epidemiological evidence and proposed mechanisms. Nat Rev Cancer 2004, 4(8):579-591.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Canchola AJ, Anton-Culver H, Bernstein L, et al.: Body size and the risk of postmenopausal breast cancer subtypes in the California Teachers Study cohort. Cancer Causes Control 2012. Jan 28 [Epub ahead of print]Google Scholar
  12. Chen L, Magliano DJ, Zimmet PZ: The worldwide epidemiology of type 2 diabetes mellitus-present and future perspectives. Nat Rev Endocrinol 2011, 8(4):228-236. 10.1038/nrendo.2011.183View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Chu SY, Lee NC, Wingo PA, et al.: The relationship between body mass and breast cancer among women enrolled in the Cancer and Steroid Hormone Study. J Clin Epidemiol 1991, 44(11):1197-1206. 10.1016/0895-4356(91)90152-YView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Colditz GA, Rosner BA, Chen WY, et al.: Risk factors for breast cancer according to estrogen and progesterone receptor status. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004, 96(3):218-228. 10.1093/jnci/djh025View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  15. Feigelson HS, Jonas CR, Teras LR, et al.: Weight gain, body mass index, hormone replacement therapy, and postmenopausal breast cancer in a large prospective study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004, 13(2):220-224. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-03-0301View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Flegal KM, Carroll MD, Ogden CL, et al.: Prevalence and trends in obesity among US adults, 1999–2008. JAMA 2010, 303(3):235-241. 10.1001/jama.2009.2014View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  17. Friedenreich CM: Review of anthropometric factors and breast cancer risk. Eur J Cancer Prev 2001, 10(1):15-32. 10.1097/00008469-200102000-00003View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Friedenreich CM, Courneya KS, Bryant HE: Case–control study of anthropometric measures and breast cancer risk. Int J Cancer 2002, 99(3):445-452. 10.1002/ijc.10389View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Hall IJ, Newman B, Millikan RC, et al.: Body size and breast cancer risk in black women and white women: the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. Am J Epidemiol 2000, 151(8):754-764. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a010275View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Huang Z, Hankinson SE, Colditz GA, et al.: Dual effects of weight and weight gain on breast cancer risk. Jama 1997, 278(17):1407-1411. 10.1001/jama.1997.03550170037029View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Huang Z, Willett WC, Colditz GA, et al.: Waist circumference, waist:hip ratio, and risk of breast cancer in the Nurses' Health Study. Am J Epidemiol 1999, 150(12):1316-1324. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009963View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  22. Huang WY, Newman B, Millikan RC, et al.: Hormone-related factors and risk of breast cancer in relation to estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor status. Am J Epidemiol 2000, 151(7):703-714. 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a010265View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  23. John EM, Horn-Ross PL, Koo J: Lifetime physical activity and breast cancer risk in a multiethnic population: the San Francisco Bay area breast cancer study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003, 12(11 Pt 1):1143-1152.Google Scholar
  24. John EM, Phipps AI, Davis A, et al.: Migration history, acculturation, and breast cancer risk in Hispanic women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005, 14(12):2905-2913. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0483View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. John EM, Sangaramoorthy M, Phipps AI, et al.: Adult body size, hormone receptor status, and premenopausal breast cancer risk in a multiethnic population: the San Francisco Bay Area breast cancer study. Am J Epidemiol 2011, 173(2):201-216. 10.1093/aje/kwq345View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Katzmarzyk PT, Bray GA, Greenway FL, et al.: Racial differences in abdominal depot-specific adiposity in white and African American adults. Am J Clin Nutr 2010, 91(1):7-15. 10.3945/ajcn.2009.28136View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Lahmann PH, Hoffmann K, Allen N, et al.: Body size and breast cancer risk: findings from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer And Nutrition (EPIC). Int J Cancer 2004, 111(5):762-771. 10.1002/ijc.20315View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Lahmann PH, Schulz M, Hoffmann K, et al.: Long-term weight change and breast cancer risk: the European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition (EPIC). Br J Cancer 2005, 93(5):582-589. 10.1038/sj.bjc.6602763View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Ma H, Bernstein L, Pike MC, et al.: Reproductive factors and breast cancer risk according to joint estrogen and progesterone receptor status: a meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. Breast Cancer Res 2006, 8(4):R43. 10.1186/bcr1525View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  30. Macinnis RJ, English DR, Gertig DM, et al.: Body size and composition and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004, 13(12):2117-2125.Google Scholar
  31. Magnusson C, Baron J, Persson I, et al.: Body size in different periods of life and breast cancer risk in post-menopausal women. Int J Cancer 1998, 76(1):29-34. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19980330)76:1<29::AID-IJC6>3.0.CO;2-#View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Molarius A, Seidell JC: Selection of anthropometric indicators for classification of abdominal fatness–a critical review. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1998, 22(8):719-727. 10.1038/sj.ijo.0800660View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  33. Morimoto LM, White E, Chen Z, et al.: Obesity, body size, and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer: the Women's Health Initiative (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2002, 13(8):741-751. 10.1023/A:1020239211145View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Nemesure B, Wu SY, Hennis A, et al.: Body size and breast cancer in a black population–the Barbados National Cancer Study. Cancer Causes Control 2009, 20(3):387-394. 10.1007/s10552-008-9253-3View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  35. Ogundiran TO, Huo D, Adenipekun A, et al.: Case–control study of body size and breast cancer risk in Nigerian women. Am J Epidemiol 2010, 172(6):682-690. 10.1093/aje/kwq180View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  36. Ogundiran TO, Huo D, Adenipekun A, et al.: Body fat distribution and breast cancer risk: findings from the Nigerian breast cancer study. Cancer Causes Control 2012, 23(4):565-574. 10.1007/s10552-012-9916-yView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  37. Okobia MN, Bunker CH, Zmuda JM, et al.: Anthropometry and breast cancer risk in Nigerian women. Breast J 2006, 12(5):462-466. 10.1111/j.1075-122X.2006.00304.xView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  38. Palmer JR, Adams-Campbell LL, Boggs DA, et al.: A prospective study of body size and breast cancer in black women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007, 16(9):1795-1802. 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0336View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  39. Pinheiro RL, Sarian LO, Pinto-Neto AM, et al.: Relationship between body mass index, waist circumference and waist to hip ratio and the steroid hormone receptor status in breast carcinoma of pre- and postmenopausal women. Breast 2009, 18(1):8-12. 10.1016/j.breast.2008.09.001View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  40. Potter JD, Cerhan JR, Sellers TA, et al.: Progesterone and estrogen receptors and mammary neoplasia in the Iowa Women's Health Study: how many kinds of breast cancer are there? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1995, 4(4):319-326.Google Scholar
  41. Rankinen T, Kim SY, Perusse L, et al.: The prediction of abdominal visceral fat level from body composition and anthropometry: ROC analysis. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 1999, 23(8):801-809. 10.1038/sj.ijo.0800929View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  42. Ray M, Polite BN: Triple-negative breast cancers: a view from 10,000 feet. Cancer J 2010, 16(1):17-22. 10.1097/PPO.0b013e3181d3eef5View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  43. Ritte R, Lukanova A, Berrino F, 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(3):R76. 10.1186/bcr3186View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  44. Schatzkin A, Palmer JR, Rosenberg L, et al.: Risk factors for breast cancer in black women. J Natl Cancer Inst 1987, 78(2):213-217.Google Scholar
  45. Setiawan VW, Monroe KR, Wilkens LR, et al.: Breast cancer risk factors defined by estrogen and progesterone receptor status: the multiethnic cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 2009, 169(10):1251-1259. 10.1093/aje/kwp036View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  46. Sexton KR, Franzini L, Day RS, et al.: A review of body size and breast cancer risk in Hispanic and African American women. Cancer 2011, 117(23):5271-5281. 10.1002/cncr.26217View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  47. Siiteri PK: Adipose tissue as a source of hormones. Am J Clin Nutr 1987, 45(1 Suppl):277-282.Google Scholar
  48. Slattery ML, Sweeney C, Edwards S, et al.: Body size, weight change, fat distribution and breast cancer risk in Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007, 102(1):85-101. 10.1007/s10549-006-9292-yView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  49. Suzuki R, Orsini N, Saji S, et al.: Body weight and incidence of breast cancer defined by estrogen and progesterone receptor status–a meta-analysis. Int J Cancer 2009, 124(3):698-712. 10.1002/ijc.23943View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  50. Tehard B, Clavel-Chapelon F: Several anthropometric measurements and breast cancer risk: results of the E3N cohort study. Int J Obes (Lond) 2006, 30(1):156-163. 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803133View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  51. van den Brandt PA, Dirx MJ, Ronckers CM, et al.: Height, weight weight change, and postmenopausal breast cancer risk: The Netherlands Cohort Study. Cancer Causes Control 1997, 8(1):39-47. 10.1023/A:1018479020716View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  52. Vrieling A, Buck K, Kaaks R, et al.: Adult weight gain in relation to breast cancer risk by estrogen and progesterone receptor status: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010, 123(3):641-649. 10.1007/s10549-010-1116-4View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  53. Wenten M, Gilliland FD, Baumgartner K, et al.: Associations of weight, weight change, and body mass with breast cancer risk in Hispanic and non-Hispanic white women. Ann Epidemiol 2002, 12(6):435-444. 10.1016/S1047-2797(01)00293-9View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  54. White KK, Park SY, Kolonel LN, et al.: Body size and breast cancer risk: the multiethnic cohort. Int J Cancer 2012, 131(5):E705-E716. 10.1002/ijc.27373View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  55. WHO: Obesity: preventing and managing the global epidemic: report of a WHO Consultation. . WHO Technical Report Series 894. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2000.Google Scholar
  56. World Cancer Research Fund /American Institute for Cancer Research: Food, Nutrition, Physical Activty, and Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. Washington, D.C: AICR; 2007.Google Scholar
  57. Yang XR, Chang-Claude J, Goode EL, et al.: Associations of breast cancer risk factors with tumor subtypes: a pooled analysis from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011, 103(3):250-263. 10.1093/jnci/djq526View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  58. Zhu K, Caulfield J, Hunter S, et al.: Body mass index and breast cancer risk in African American women. Ann Epidemiol 2005, 15(2):123-128. 10.1016/j.annepidem.2004.05.011View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© John et al.; licensee Springer. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.