Bias in Observational Studies of the Association between Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Breast Cancer.

IF 2.6 3区 综合性期刊 Q1 MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES PLoS ONE Pub Date : 2015-05-04 eCollection Date: 2015-01-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0124076
Per-Henrik Zahl, Jan Mæhlen
{"title":"Bias in Observational Studies of the Association between Menopausal Hormone Therapy and Breast Cancer.","authors":"Per-Henrik Zahl,&nbsp;Jan Mæhlen","doi":"10.1371/journal.pone.0124076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>During the period 1985-2000 the breast cancer incidence rates increased 50% in the age group invited to mammography screening in Norway and Sweden. Simultaneously, use of hormone replacement treatment therapy (HT) increased 5 times. Several influential observational studies showed that HT was associated with 50% to 100% increased risk of breast cancer and most for those using combined (estrogen plus progestin) hormone replacement therapy (CHT). In contrast, the randomized WHI trial reported that CHT increased the risk by 10% for those not having previously used hormones and 24% when including previous users in the analyses. In another randomized trial, estrogen use only was not associated with any increased risk at all. After the WHI trial was published in 2003, use of HT dropped 70% within 5 years in Norway and Sweden while breast cancer rates were essentially unchanged. After 2008, HT use has dropped further and breast cancer incidence rates have started increasing again. The study objective is to calculate and to explain potential bias in the observational study design.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>Here we use data from the randomized WHI trial and analyze these data as done in the observational studies to calculate the magnitude of the potential biases in the observational study design. Time varying effect of hormones and categorization of the follow-up time may increase the hazard ratio for long-term users from 1.10 to 1.48. Selective retrospective reporting of hormone use may further increase the hazard ratio to 1.68.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We suggest that the mechanism causing higher hazard ratio of breast cancer (compared to the observational studies) is the time-varying effect of CHT on the breast cancer risk and selective retrospective reporting of hormone use. Other risk factors for the increase in breast cancer risk in the age group 50-69 years should be considered, for example, overdiagnosis.</p>","PeriodicalId":20189,"journal":{"name":"PLoS ONE","volume":" ","pages":"e0124076"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2015-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1371/journal.pone.0124076","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS ONE","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124076","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2015/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

Abstract

Background: During the period 1985-2000 the breast cancer incidence rates increased 50% in the age group invited to mammography screening in Norway and Sweden. Simultaneously, use of hormone replacement treatment therapy (HT) increased 5 times. Several influential observational studies showed that HT was associated with 50% to 100% increased risk of breast cancer and most for those using combined (estrogen plus progestin) hormone replacement therapy (CHT). In contrast, the randomized WHI trial reported that CHT increased the risk by 10% for those not having previously used hormones and 24% when including previous users in the analyses. In another randomized trial, estrogen use only was not associated with any increased risk at all. After the WHI trial was published in 2003, use of HT dropped 70% within 5 years in Norway and Sweden while breast cancer rates were essentially unchanged. After 2008, HT use has dropped further and breast cancer incidence rates have started increasing again. The study objective is to calculate and to explain potential bias in the observational study design.

Methods and findings: Here we use data from the randomized WHI trial and analyze these data as done in the observational studies to calculate the magnitude of the potential biases in the observational study design. Time varying effect of hormones and categorization of the follow-up time may increase the hazard ratio for long-term users from 1.10 to 1.48. Selective retrospective reporting of hormone use may further increase the hazard ratio to 1.68.

Conclusions: We suggest that the mechanism causing higher hazard ratio of breast cancer (compared to the observational studies) is the time-varying effect of CHT on the breast cancer risk and selective retrospective reporting of hormone use. Other risk factors for the increase in breast cancer risk in the age group 50-69 years should be considered, for example, overdiagnosis.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
绝经期激素治疗与乳腺癌相关性观察性研究的偏倚。
背景:1985-2000年期间,挪威和瑞典接受乳房x光检查的年龄组乳腺癌发病率增加了50%。同时,激素替代疗法(HT)的使用增加了5倍。几项有影响力的观察性研究表明,激素替代疗法与乳腺癌风险增加50%至100%相关,其中大多数是使用联合(雌激素加黄体酮)激素替代疗法(CHT)的患者。相比之下,WHI的随机试验报告说,对于那些以前没有使用过激素的人来说,CHT增加了10%的风险,当分析中包括以前使用过激素的人时,这一风险增加了24%。在另一项随机试验中,仅使用雌激素与任何风险增加完全无关。2003年WHI试验发表后,挪威和瑞典的激素疗法使用量在5年内下降了70%,而乳腺癌发病率基本没有变化。2008年以后,HT的使用进一步下降,乳腺癌发病率又开始上升。研究目的是计算和解释观察性研究设计中的潜在偏倚。方法和发现:在这里,我们使用来自WHI随机试验的数据,并像观察性研究一样分析这些数据,以计算观察性研究设计中潜在偏倚的程度。激素的时变效应和随访时间的分类可能使长期服用者的危险比从1.10增加到1.48。选择性的激素使用回顾性报告可能进一步增加风险比至1.68。结论:我们认为(与观察性研究相比)导致乳腺癌风险比升高的机制是CHT对乳腺癌风险的时变效应和选择性回顾性报告激素使用。50-69岁年龄组乳腺癌风险增加的其他危险因素也应考虑在内,例如,过度诊断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS ONE
PLoS ONE 生物-生物学
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
5.40%
发文量
14242
审稿时长
3.7 months
期刊介绍: PLOS ONE is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access, online publication. PLOS ONE welcomes reports on primary research from any scientific discipline. It provides: * Open-access—freely accessible online, authors retain copyright * Fast publication times * Peer review by expert, practicing researchers * Post-publication tools to indicate quality and impact * Community-based dialogue on articles * Worldwide media coverage
期刊最新文献
Effect of formic acid treatment on Apis mellifera foraging behavior using nanopore metabarcoding technologies. Evaluation of usability and acceptability of a Peruvian telemental health service for early assessment among vulnerable occupational workers: Mixed-method study with a user-centered design approach. Expression of concern: Will advancement in technologies bring fear and damage human employment? Evidence from China's manufacturing industry. Exploring structural, functional, evolutionary, and genetic characteristics of sugar transporters in maize and their roles in abiotic stress tolerance. Expression of Concern: A practical approach for colorectal cancer diagnosis based on machine learning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1