4.3 Article

Telomere length in peripheral blood and breast cancer risk in a prospective case-cohort analysis: results from the Sister Study

Journal

CANCER CAUSES & CONTROL
Volume 22, Issue 7, Pages 1061-1066

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10552-011-9778-8

Keywords

Breast cancer; Telomere length; Prospective study; Biomarker; qPCR

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [Z01 ES044005, Z01 ES049033]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Telomeres are required for maintaining genomic integrity and may play a role in carcinogenesis. Some, but not all, epidemiologic studies have found that short telomeres in leukocytes are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer. To further elucidate this potential association, we examined telomere length in relation to breast cancer risk in prospectively collected blood samples from the Sister Study, a cohort of women aged 35-74 years who have a sister with breast cancer. We performed a case-cohort analysis comparing incident breast cancer cases (n = 342) with a subcohort (n = 735), randomly selected from 29,026 participants, enrolled by June 1, 2007. Relative telomere length in peripheral blood cells was estimated using a single-tube monochrome multiplex quantitative PCR assay. No association was observed between telomere length and breast cancer risk. Compared with the longest quartile, hazard ratios (HR) associated with the second, third, and the shortest quartile were 0.91 [95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.62-1.34], 1.11 (95% CI: 0.77-1.60), and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.64-1.35), respectively. Subgroup analyses by menopausal status, invasiveness, or estrogen receptor status of breast cancer did not reveal evidence of association between telomere length in blood cells and subsequent breast cancer risk. This prospective investigation does not support telomere length in blood cells as a biomarker for breast cancer risk.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available