Ultra-processed foods, adiposity and risk of head and neck cancer and oesophageal adenocarcinoma in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study: a mediation analysis

PURPOSE

To investigate the role of adiposity in the associations between ultra-processed food (UPF) consumption and head and neck cancer (HNC) and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (OAC) in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort.

METHODS

Our study included 450,111 EPIC participants. We used Cox regressions to investigate the associations between the consumption of UPFs and HNC and OAC risk. A mediation analysis was performed to assess the role of body mass index (BMI) and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) in these associations. In sensitivity analyses, we investigated accidental death as a negative control outcome.

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 14.13 ± 3.98 years, 910 and 215 participants developed HNC and OAC, respectively. A 10% g/d higher consumption of UPFs was associated with an increased risk of HNC (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14-1.34) and OAC (HR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.47). WHR mediated 5% (95% CI 3-10%) of the association between the consumption of UPFs and HNC risk, while BMI and WHR, respectively, mediated 13% (95% CI 6-53%) and 15% (95% CI 8-72%) of the association between the consumption of UPFs and OAC risk. UPF consumption was positively associated with accidental death in the negative control analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

We reaffirmed that higher UPF consumption is associated with greater risk of HNC and OAC in EPIC. The proportion mediated via adiposity was small. Further research is required to investigate other mechanisms that may be at play (if there is indeed any causal effect of UPF consumption on these cancers).

Mapping the European cancer prevention research landscape: A case for more prevention research funding

Despite the strong evidence of prevention as a prime defence against the disease, the majority of cancer research investment continues to be made in basic science and clinical translational research. Little quantitative data is available to guide decisions on the choice of research priorities or the allocation of research resources. The primary aim of the mapping of the European cancer prevention research landscape presented in this paper is to provide the evidence-base to inform future investments in cancer research. Using bibliometric data to identify funders that are active in prevention research in Europe and in the world, we have identified that 14% of cancer research papers had a focus on prevention research and those were funded by 16% of all the European cancer research funders. An important finding of our study is the lack of research on primary prevention with primary prevention funders accounting for 25% of European cancer prevention funders, meaning that less than 4% of all European cancer research funders identified show an interest in primary prevention. An additional analysis revealed that 7% of European cancer prevention research papers are categorised as implementation projects, meaning that only 1% of all cancer research publications are implementation research in cancer prevention. This paper highlights that the narrow focus on biology and treatment in Europe needs to be widened to include such areas as primary prevention and secondary prevention and a larger concentration on implementation research. These data can help support a more policy-focused cancer research agenda for individual European governments and charitable and philanthropic organisations and stimulate joining efforts across Europe to create a more systematic and structured approach to cancer prevention.

Use of menopausal hormone therapy and ovarian cancer risk in a French cohort study

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological studies have found that menopausal hormone therapy (MHT) use is associated with an increased ovarian cancer risk. However, whether different MHT types confer the same level of risk is unclear. We estimated the associations between different MHT types and the risk of ovarian cancer in a prospective cohort.

METHODS

The study population included 75 606 postmenopausal women from the E3N cohort. Exposure to MHT was identified from self-reports in biennial questionnaires between 1992 and 2004 and from drug claim data matched to the cohort between 2004 and 2014. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of ovarian cancer were estimated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models with MHT as a time-varying exposure. Tests of statistical significance were 2-sided.

RESULTS

Over an average 15.3 years follow-up, 416 ovarian cancers were diagnosed. Hazard ratios of ovarian cancer associated with ever use of estrogens combined with progesterone or dydrogesterone and ever use of estrogens combined with other progestagen were equal to 1.28 (95% CI = 1.04 to 1.57) and 0.81 (95% CI = 0.65 to 1.00), respectively (Phomogeneity = .003), compared with never use. The hazard ratio for unopposed estrogen use was 1.09 (95% CI = 0.82 to 1.46). We found no trend according to duration of use or time since last use except for estrogens combined with progesterone or dydrogesterone, which showed decreasing risk with increasing time since last use.

CONCLUSION

Different MHT types may impact ovarian cancer risk differentially. The possibility that MHT containing progestagens other than progesterone or dydrogesterone may confer some protection should be evaluated in other epidemiological studies.

Antiplatelet drugs and breast cancer risk in a large nationwide Danish case-control study

Low-dose aspirin has been hypothesized to prevent cancer risk by inhibiting platelet aggregation. However, the anti-cancer effect of low-dose aspirin has recently been questioned and its effect on breast cancer development remains unclear. The impact of other antiplatelet drugs on breast cancer risk has rarely been evaluated. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the associations between breast cancer risk and antiplatelet drug use in a nationwide nested case-control study. From the Danish healthcare registries, we identified as cases all women with invasive breast cancer diagnosis between 2001 and 2018 (n = 68 852). The date of diagnosis corresponded to the index date. We matched cases to 10 population controls on age and calendar time, using risk set sampling. Controls were assigned the same index date as their matched case. We used the prescription registry to identify exposure to low-dose aspirin, clopidogrel and dipyridamole. We defined ever use of antiplatelet drugs as at least two prescriptions filled up to 1 year before the index date. We applied conditional logistic regression to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals for breast cancer associated with the use of antiplatelet drugs, overall, by breast cancer subtype and by cumulative dose. Twelve percent of women had ever been exposed to low-dose aspirin, 2% to clopidogrel and 2% to dipyridamole. In multivariable models, breast cancer risk was not associated with ever use of low-dose aspirin (OR = 1.00 [0.97-1.03]), clopidogrel (OR = 0.93 [0.87-1.00]), and dipyridamole (OR = 1.02 [0.94-1.10]), compared with never use, and there was no evidence of a dose-response relation. However, we found an inverse association between dipyridamole use and breast cancer risk among women aged <55 years old, with suggestion of a dose-response relationship (OR per 1000 Defined Daily Doses = 0.72 [0.54-0.95]). Associations did not differ by breast cancer histological type, estrogen receptor status or clinical stage at diagnosis. Overall, the findings from this study do not support the use of antiplatelet drugs for breast cancer prevention.

Abstract P4-03-17: Parity, Use of Statins and Low-dose Aspirin, and Breast Cancer Risk – data from two large cohort studies

Background: Statins and low-dose aspirin have been associated with a reduced breast cancer (BC) incidence, but results are inconsistent. Based on emerging evidence that parity, a protective factor for breast cancer, and these drugs modulate immunity, we hypothesized that the association between drug use and breast cancer risk may differ by parity. Objectives: To assess the associations of statin and low-dose aspirin use with BC incidence according to parity in French and Danish cohorts. Methods: We conducted two cohort studies, using data from the French E3N study and a Danish nationwide population-based cohort, respectively. From E3N, 51,482 women, mean age 65.5 years, were enrolled in 2005 and followed until 2014. Data on parity (here full-term pregnancies), drug use, and incident BC were acquired from questionnaires, a drug reimbursement database, pathology verified self-reports and the national cause-of-death registry, respectively. From nationwide health registries, we included all Danish women free of BC and aged 45 years in 2000-2005 (n=198,575), with follow-up to 2014. Use of the exposure drugs were defined as at least two reimbursements/filled prescriptions. In both cohorts, multivariable-adjusted Cox regression was used to compute hazard ratios (HR) for drug exposure, treated as time-varying lagged variables, and BC risk stratified by parity (0, 1, 2, 3+). Results: In E3N and Denmark, 1,878 and 5,436 incident BC cases occurred in a mean follow-up of 8.5 and 11.5 years, respectively. At the end of follow-up, 35% and 19% of E3N and 16% and 8% of the Danish cohort had been exposed to statins and low-dose aspirin, respectively. In E3N, effect modification was observed between parity and statins, but not low-dose aspirin. For statins, the HRs for use vs no use were 1.29 (0.97-1.72), 1.27 (0.99-1.65), 1.08 (0.91-1.27), and 0.76 (0.61-0.95) among women with 0, 1, 2, and 3+ full-term pregnancies, respectively (p-het=0.005). The corresponding estimates for low-dose aspirin were: 1.17 (0.80-1.71), 0.81 (0.54-1.20), 1.13 (0.90-1.43), and 1.22 (0.93-1.61; p-het=0.6). In contrast, the Danish data did not suggest any effect modification. HRs for use vs no use of statins were 0.82 (0.60-1.13), 1.05 (0.80-1.37), 0.91 (0.75-1.10), and 1.09 (0.83-1.44) among women with parity of 0, 1, 2, and 3+, respectively (p-het=0.3). For low-dose aspirin HRs were: 1.09 (0.75-1.59), 0.79 (0.54-1.15), 1.04 (0.82-1.32), and 0.99 (0.71-1.40; p-het=0.8). Conclusions: We observed effect modification by parity for the association between statins and breast cancer risk in the French but not the Danish cohort. Whether the age difference between the cohorts explains the inconsistent results should be explored.

Citation Format: Julie A. Schmidt, Agnès Fournier, Manon Cairat, Aurélie Mailhac, Henrik Sørensen, Marc Gunter, Deirdre Cronin-Fenton. Parity, Use of Statins and Low-dose Aspirin, and Breast Cancer Risk – data from two large cohort studies [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr P4-03-17.

Dietary intakes of dioxins and polychlorobiphenyls (PCBs) and breast cancer risk in 9 European countries

BACKGROUND

Dioxins and polychlorobiphenyls (PCBs) are persistent organic pollutants that have demonstrated endocrine disrupting properties. Several of these chemicals are carcinogenic and positive associations have been suggested with breast cancer risk. In general population, diet represents the main source of exposure.

METHODS

Associations between dietary intake of 17 dioxins and 35 PCBs and breast cancer were evaluated in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort from nine European countries using multivariable Cox regressions. The present study included 318,607 women (mean ± SD age: 50.7 ± 9.7) with 13,241 incident invasive breast cancers and a median follow-up of 14.9 years (IQR = 13.5-16.4). Dietary intake of dioxins and PCBs was assessed combining EPIC food consumption data with food contamination data provided by the European Food Safety Authority.

RESULTS

Exposure to dioxins, dioxins + Dioxin-Like-PCBs, Dioxin-Like-PCBs (DL-PCBs), and Non-Dioxin-Like-PCBs (NDL-PCBs) estimated from reported dietary intakes were not associated with breast cancer incidence, with the following hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals for an increment of 1 SD: HRdioxins = 1.00 (0.98 to 1.02), HRdioxins+DL-PCB = 1.01 (0.98 to 1.03), HRDL-PCB = 1.01 (0.98 to 1.03), and HRNDL-PCB = 1.01 (0.99 to 1.03). Results remained unchanged when analyzing intakes as quintile groups, as well as when analyses were run separately per country, or separating breast cancer cases based on estrogen receptor status or after further adjustments on main contributing food groups to PCBs and dioxins intake and nutritional factors.

CONCLUSIONS

This large European prospective study does not support the hypothesis of an association between dietary intake of dioxins and PCBs and breast cancer risk.

Statin Use and Skin Cancer Risk: A Prospective Cohort Study

Epidemiological studies on statin use in relation to skin cancer risk are scarce and yielded conflicting results. We explored this association in Etude Epidémiologique auprès de femmes de l'Education Nationale, a prospective cohort of French women born in 1925-1950. Health and lifestyle data were self-reported biennially and matched with drug reimbursement data, allowing the identification of participants' statin use since 2004. Multivariable cause-specific hazards regression models adjusted for skin cancer risk factors estimated hazard ratios with 95% confidence intervals. Over 2004-2014, 455 cutaneous melanoma, 1,741 basal cell carcinoma, and 268 squamous cell carcinoma cases were ascertained among 62,473 women. Compared with never use, there were no associations between ever use of statins and melanoma (hazard ratio = 1.16, 95% confidence interval = 0.94-1.44) or squamous cell carcinoma (hazard ratio = 0.89, 95% confidence interval = 0.66-1.19) risks and a decrease in basal cell carcinoma risk with ever use of statins (hazard ratio = 0.89, 95% confidence interval = 0.79-0.996). We found no trend of increasing or decreasing risks with dose, duration of use, time since first use, or age at first use and no statistically significant effect modification by pigmentary traits or residential UVR exposure. Because of the limited number of studies evaluating the associations between the use of statins and the risks of melanoma, basal cell carcinoma, and squamous cell carcinoma, these findings would deserve further investigation in other settings.

Circulating inflammatory biomarkers, adipokines and breast cancer risk-a case-control study nested within the EPIC cohort

BACKGROUND

Inflammation has been hypothesized to play a role in the development and progression of breast cancer and might differently impact breast cancer risk among pre and postmenopausal women. We performed a nested case-control study to examine whether pre-diagnostic circulating concentrations of adiponectin, leptin, c-reactive protein (CRP), tumour necrosis factor-α, interferon-γ and 6 interleukins were associated with breast cancer risk, overall and by menopausal status.

METHODS

Pre-diagnostic levels of inflammatory biomarkers were measured in plasma from 1558 case-control pairs from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) cohort. We used conditional logistic regression to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) of breast cancer at blood collection, per one standard deviation increase in biomarker concentration.

RESULTS

Cases were diagnosed at a mean age of 61.4 years on average 8.6 years after blood collection. No statistically significant association was observed between inflammatory markers and breast cancer risk overall. In premenopausal women, borderline significant inverse associations were observed for leptin, leptin-to-adiponectin ratio and CRP [OR= 0.89 (0.77-1.03), OR= 0.88 (0.76-1.01) and OR= 0.87 (0.75-1.01), respectively] while positive associations were observed among postmenopausal women [OR= 1.16 (1.05-1.29), OR= 1.11 (1.01-1.23), OR= 1.10 (0.99-1.22), respectively]. Adjustment for BMI strengthened the estimates in premenopausal women [leptin: OR = 0.83 (0.68-1.00), leptin-to-adiponectin ratio: OR = 0.80 (0.66-0.97), CRP: OR = 0.85 (0.72-1.00)] but attenuated the estimates in postmenopausal women [leptin: OR = 1.09 (0.96-1.24), leptin-to-adiponectin ratio: OR = 1.02 (0.89-1.16), CRP: OR = 1.04 (0.92-1.16)].

CONCLUSIONS

Associations between CRP, leptin and leptin-to-adiponectin ratio with breast cancer risk may represent the dual effect of obesity by menopausal status although this deserves further investigation.

Inflammatory potential of the diet and risk of breast cancer in the European Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC) study

The role of chronic inflammation on breast cancer (BC) risk remains unclear beyond as an underlying mechanism of obesity and physical activity. We aimed to evaluate the association between the inflammatory potential of the diet and risk of BC overall, according to menopausal status and tumour subtypes. Within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort, 318,686 women were followed for 14 years, among whom 13,246 incident BC cases were identified. The inflammatory potential of the diet was characterized by an inflammatory score of the diet (ISD). Multivariable Cox regression models were used to assess the potential effect of the ISD on BC risk by means of hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). ISD was positively associated with BC risk. Each increase of one standard deviation (1-Sd) of the score increased by 4% the risk of BC (HR = 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.07). Women in the highest quintile of the ISD (indicating a most pro-inflammatory diet) had a 12% increase in risk compared with those in the lowest quintile (HR = 1.12; 95% CI 1.04-1.21) with a significant trend. The association was strongest among premenopausal women, with an 8% increased risk for 1-Sd increase in the score (HR = 1.08; 95% CI 1.01-1.14). The pattern of the association was quite homogeneous by BC subtypes based on hormone receptor status. There were no significant interactions between ISD and body mass index, physical activity, or alcohol consumption. Women consuming more pro-inflammatory diets as measured by ISD are at increased risk for BC, especially premenopausal women.

Use of systemic glucocorticoids and risk of breast cancer in a prospective cohort of postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Glucocorticoids could theoretically decrease breast cancer risk through their anti-inflammatory effects or increase risk through immunosuppression. However, epidemiological evidence is limited regarding the associations between glucocorticoid use and breast cancer risk.

METHODS

We investigated the association between systemic glucocorticoid use and breast cancer incidence in the E3N cohort, which includes 98,995 women with information on various characteristics collected from repeated questionnaires complemented with drug reimbursement data available from 2004. Women with at least two reimbursements of systemic glucocorticoids in any previous 3-month period since January 1, 2004, were defined as exposed. We considered exposure as a time-varying parameter, and we used multivariable Cox regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) of breast cancer. We performed a competing risk analysis using a cause-specific hazard approach to study the heterogeneity by tumour subtype/stage/grade.

RESULTS

Among 62,512 postmenopausal women (median age at inclusion of 63 years old), 2864 developed breast cancer during a median follow-up of 9 years (between years 2004 and 2014). Compared with non-exposure, glucocorticoid exposure was not associated with overall breast cancer risk [HR = 0.94 (0.85-1.05)]; however, it was associated with a higher risk of in situ breast cancer and a lower risk of invasive breast cancer [HRinsitu = 1.34 (1.01-1.78); HRinvasive = 0.86 (0.76-0.97); Phomogeneity = 0.01]. Regarding the risk of invasive breast cancer, glucocorticoid exposure was inversely associated with oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer [HRER+ = 0.82 (0.72-0.94); HRER- = 1.21 (0.88-1.66); Phomogeneity = 0.03]; it was also inversely associated with the risk of stage 1 or stage 2 tumours but positively associated with the risk of stage 3/4 breast cancers [HRstage1 = 0.87 (0.75-1.01); HRstage2 = 0.67 (0.52-0.86); HRstage3/4 = 1.49 (1.02-2.20); Phomogeneity = 0.01].

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that the association between systemic glucocorticoid use and breast cancer risk may differ by tumour subtype and stage.

Antiplatelet Drug Use and Breast Cancer Risk in a Prospective Cohort of Postmenopausal Women

BACKGROUND

Epidemiologic evidence is insufficient to draw conclusions on the impact of low-dose aspirin use on breast cancer risk, and the potential impact of other antiplatelet drugs such as clopidogrel needs to be explored.

METHODS

We investigated the association between breast cancer risk and low-dose aspirin or clopidogrel use in the E3N cohort, which includes 98,995 women, with information on breast cancer risk factors collected from biennial questionnaires matched with drug reimbursement data available from 2004. Women with at least two reimbursements of the drug of interest in any previous 3-month period were considered "ever" exposed. Exposure was considered as time-varying and multivariable Cox regression models were used to estimate HRs of breast cancer.

RESULTS

Among 62,512 postmenopausal women followed during 9 years on average, 2,864 breast cancer cases were identified. Compared with never use, a transient higher breast cancer risk was observed during the third year of low-dose aspirin use [HR2-≤3 years of use = 1.49 (1.08-2.07)], followed by a lower risk [HR4+ years of use = 0.72 (0.52-0.99)]. Clopidogrel ever use was associated with a higher breast cancer risk [HR, 1.30 (1.02-1.68)], restricted to estrogen receptor negative (ER-) tumors [HRER+ = 1.14 (0.83-1.57), HRER- = 3.07 (1.64-5.76), P homogeneity = 0.01].

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose aspirin was associated with a lower breast cancer risk only after several years of use, while ever use of clopidogrel was associated with a higher ER- breast cancer risk.

IMPACT

Antiplatelet drugs are not good pharmacologic candidates for breast cancer prevention.

Use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and breast cancer risk in a prospective cohort of postmenopausal women

BACKGROUND

Although anti-inflammatory agents could theoretically have anticancer properties, results from cohort studies on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and breast cancer (BC) risk are inconsistent.

METHODS

We investigated the association between NSAID use and BC incidence in the French E3N prospective cohort, which includes 98,995 women born between 1925 and 1950 and insured by a health insurance plan that covers mostly teachers. Self-reported information on lifestyle and medical history has been collected biennially by questionnaires and matched with data from a drug reimbursement database covering the period 2004-2014. Women who self-reported current NSAID use in the 2000 or 2002 questionnaires or with at least two reimbursements in any previous 3-month period were defined as exposed to NSAIDs. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) for the association of NSAID use with BC risk.

RESULTS

In the current analysis, 62,512 postmenopausal women were followed between 2004 and 2014 (9 years on average, starting at a mean age of 63 years; 2864 incident BC). In multivariable models, there was no statistically significant association between NSAID use and BC risk [HR = 1.00 (0.92-1.08), compared with non-exposed women]. The NSAID-BC associations did not differ by NSAID types, BC subtypes, risk factors, and comorbidities, nor by duration and dose of use. However, a statistically significant interaction was observed by proton pump inhibitor (PPI) drug use (Pinteraction = 0.01) whereby a decreased risk of BC with NSAID use was only observed among women who also used PPI before.

CONCLUSION

Only women who used NSAIDs after having used PPI had a lower risk of BC. This result is novel and requires replication in other studies.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use and breast cancer risk in a European prospective cohort study

Experimental studies have shown a protective effect of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on breast cancer development. However, results from epidemiological cohort studies are less consistent. Our objective was to assess the association between NSAID use and breast cancer risk within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC). EPIC is a prospective cohort study initiated in 1992 in 10 European countries. Self-reported information on NSAID use at baseline has been collected in five EPIC countries. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to estimate hazard ratios for the association of NSAID use with breast cancer incidence with adjustment for potential confounders. We also assessed effect modification by breast cancer risk factors and examined the associations within specific breast cancer subtypes. Among the 140,981 women included in the analysis, 7% were regularly using NSAIDs at baseline. During a median follow-up time period of 13 years, 7,379 incident breast cancer cases were diagnosed (816 in situ and 6,563 invasive). There were no statistically significant associations between NSAID use and breast cancer risk, overall and by subtypes. However, a statistically significant interaction was observed for invasive cases between NSAID use and ever use of menopausal hormonal therapy (MHT) among postmenopausal women [MHT users: HRNSAID use  = 0.84 (0.73-0.96); non MHT users: HRNSAID use  = 1.08 (0.93-1.25); pinteraction  = 0.05]. Our results indicate potential effect modification of MHT use on the association between use of NSAIDs and breast cancer risk which deserves in-depth investigation in studies with accurate data on both NSAID and MHT use.