Night Shift Work and Breast Cancer Incidence: Three Prospective Studies and Meta-analysis of Published Studies.

BACKGROUND: It has been proposed that night shift work could increase breast cancer incidence. A 2007 World Health Organization review concluded, mainly from animal evidence, that shift work involving circadian disruption is probably carcinogenic to humans. We therefore aimed to generate prospective epidemiological evidence on night shift work and breast cancer incidence. METHODS: Overall, 522 246 Million Women Study, 22 559 EPIC-Oxford, and 251 045 UK Biobank participants answered questions on shift work and were followed for incident cancer. Cox regression yielded multivariable-adjusted breast cancer incidence rate ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for night shift work vs no night shift work, and likelihood ratio tests for interaction were used to assess heterogeneity. Our meta-analyses combined these and relative risks from the seven previously published prospective studies (1.4 million women in total), using inverse-variance weighted averages of the study-specific log RRs. RESULTS: In the Million Women Study, EPIC-Oxford, and UK Biobank, respectively, 673, 28, and 67 women who reported night shift work developed breast cancer, and the RRs for any vs no night shift work were 1.00 (95% CI = 0.92 to 1.08), 1.07 (95% CI = 0.71 to 1.62), and 0.78 (95% CI = 0.61 to 1.00). In the Million Women Study, the RR for 20 or more years of night shift work was 1.00 (95% CI = 0.81 to 1.23), with no statistically significant heterogeneity by sleep patterns or breast cancer risk factors. Our meta-analysis of all 10 prospective studies included 4660 breast cancers in women reporting night shift work; compared with other women, the combined relative risks were 0.99 (95% CI = 0.95 to 1.03) for any night shift work, 1.01 (95% CI = 0.93 to 1.10) for 20 or more years of night shift work, and 1.00 (95% CI = 0.87 to 1.14) for 30 or more years. CONCLUSIONS: The totality of the prospective evidence shows that night shift work, including long-term shift work, has little or no effect on breast cancer incidence.

Global surveillance of cancer survival 1995-2009: analysis of individual data for 25,676,887 patients from 279 population-based registries in 67 countries (CONCORD-2).

BACKGROUND: Worldwide data for cancer survival are scarce. We aimed to initiate worldwide surveillance of cancer survival by central analysis of population-based registry data, as a metric of the effectiveness of health systems, and to inform global policy on cancer control. METHODS: Individual tumour records were submitted by 279 population-based cancer registries in 67 countries for 25·7 million adults (age 15-99 years) and 75,000 children (age 0-14 years) diagnosed with cancer during 1995-2009 and followed up to Dec 31, 2009, or later. We looked at cancers of the stomach, colon, rectum, liver, lung, breast (women), cervix, ovary, and prostate in adults, and adult and childhood leukaemia. Standardised quality control procedures were applied; errors were corrected by the registry concerned. We estimated 5-year net survival, adjusted for background mortality in every country or region by age (single year), sex, and calendar year, and by race or ethnic origin in some countries. Estimates were age-standardised with the International Cancer Survival Standard weights. FINDINGS: 5-year survival from colon, rectal, and breast cancers has increased steadily in most developed countries. For patients diagnosed during 2005-09, survival for colon and rectal cancer reached 60% or more in 22 countries around the world; for breast cancer, 5-year survival rose to 85% or higher in 17 countries worldwide. Liver and lung cancer remain lethal in all nations: for both cancers, 5-year survival is below 20% everywhere in Europe, in the range 15-19% in North America, and as low as 7-9% in Mongolia and Thailand. Striking rises in 5-year survival from prostate cancer have occurred in many countries: survival rose by 10-20% between 1995-99 and 2005-09 in 22 countries in South America, Asia, and Europe, but survival still varies widely around the world, from less than 60% in Bulgaria and Thailand to 95% or more in Brazil, Puerto Rico, and the USA. For cervical cancer, national estimates of 5-year survival range from less than 50% to more than 70%; regional variations are much wider, and improvements between 1995-99 and 2005-09 have generally been slight. For women diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2005-09, 5-year survival was 40% or higher only in Ecuador, the USA, and 17 countries in Asia and Europe. 5-year survival for stomach cancer in 2005-09 was high (54-58%) in Japan and South Korea, compared with less than 40% in other countries. By contrast, 5-year survival from adult leukaemia in Japan and South Korea (18-23%) is lower than in most other countries. 5-year survival from childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia is less than 60% in several countries, but as high as 90% in Canada and four European countries, which suggests major deficiencies in the management of a largely curable disease. INTERPRETATION: International comparison of survival trends reveals very wide differences that are likely to be attributable to differences in access to early diagnosis and optimum treatment. Continuous worldwide surveillance of cancer survival should become an indispensable source of information for cancer patients and researchers and a stimulus for politicians to improve health policy and health-care systems. FUNDING: Canadian Partnership Against Cancer (Toronto, Canada), Cancer Focus Northern Ireland (Belfast, UK), Cancer Institute New South Wales (Sydney, Australia), Cancer Research UK (London, UK), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Atlanta, GA, USA), Swiss Re (London, UK), Swiss Cancer Research foundation (Bern, Switzerland), Swiss Cancer League (Bern, Switzerland), and University of Kentucky (Lexington, KY, USA).

First-morning urinary melatonin and breast cancer risk in the Guernsey Study.

It has been hypothesized that suppressed nocturnal melatonin production is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer, but results from several small prospective studies of the association have been inconclusive. We examined the association between nocturnal melatonin and breast cancer risk in a case-control study nested within the Guernsey III Study, a British prospective cohort study (1977-2009). Concentrations of 6-sulfatoxymelatonin were measured in prediagnostic first-morning urine samples from 251 breast cancer cases and 727 matched controls. Conditional logistic regression models were used to calculate odds ratios for breast cancer in relation to 6-sulfatoxymelatonin level. No significant association was found between 6-sulfatoxymelatonin level and breast cancer risk, either overall (for highest third vs. lowest, multivariable-adjusted odds ratio = 0.90, 95% confidence interval: 0.61, 1.33) or by menopausal status. However, in a meta-analysis of all published prospective data, including 1,113 cases from 5 studies, higher 6-sulfatoxymelatonin levels were associated with lower breast cancer risk (for highest fourth vs. lowest, odds ratio = 0.81, 95% confidence interval: 0.66, 0.99). In summary, we found no evidence that 6-sulfatoxymelatonin level in a first-morning urine sample was associated with breast cancer risk among British women. However, overall the published data suggest a modest inverse association between melatonin levels and breast cancer risk. Further data are needed to confirm this association.

Characteristics of the Million Women Study participants who have and have not worked at night.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the characteristics of women who had and had not worked at night in terms of their risk factors for common disease, indicators of general health, social activities, employment, and sleep behavior. METHODS: The Million Women Study is a large prospective cohort study of women's health in the United Kingdom with 1.3 million women recruited during 1996-2001 (aged 50-64 years) through 66 National Health Service breast screening centers. We analyzed the data from a random sample of 41 652 participants who, in 2009-2010, reported their history of night work. RESULTS: Of the participants, 1 in 8 women (13%) reported that they had ever worked at night and 1 in 50 (2%) reported working at night for ≥20 years. For 33 sociodemographic, behavioral, reproductive, and hormonal factors examined, 20 showed highly significant differences between "ever" and "never" night workers (P<0.0001); 12 showed significant trends by duration of night work (P<0.01). In particular, compared to women who had never worked at night, women who had worked at night were more likely to (i) be of lower socioeconomic status [the odds ratio (OR) for ever versus never night workers of being in the lowest third of socioeconomic status was 1.15, 99% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.06-1.25]; (ii) have ever used hormone replacement therapy (HRT) for the menopause (OR 1.43, 99% CI 1.33-1.55); (iii) be current smokers (OR 1.37, 99% CI 1.19-1.58); and (iv) be obese (OR 1.26, 99% CI 1.15-1.37). Compared to women who had never worked at night, women who had worked at night for ≥20 years were more likely to be (i) of lower socioeconomic status (OR 1.28, 99% CI 1.04-1.57); (ii) nulliparous (OR 1.47, 99% CI 1.12-1.91); (iii) current smokers (OR 1.63, 99% CI 1.18-2.25); and (iv) obese (OR 1.55, 99% CI 1.25-1.93). Former night workers were more likely than never night workers to report a range of sleep disturbances, including poor quality of sleep (OR 1.15, 99% CI 1.01-1.31) and having to take medication to sleep (OR 1.35, 99% CI 1.15-1.60). CONCLUSIONS: Women who reported having worked at night were substantially different from those who reporting never having worked at night and many of the differences would put "ever night workers" at increased risks of cancer, vascular disease, and many other common conditions.