Circadian disrupting exposures and breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis
Abstract
Purpose Shift work, short sleep duration, employment as a flight attendant, and exposure to light at night, all potential causes of circadian disruption, have been inconsistently associated with breast cancer (BrCA) risk. The aim of this meta-analysis is to quantitatively evaluate the combined and independent effects of exposure to different sources of circadian disruption on BrCA risk in women. Methods Relevant studies published through January 2014 were identified by searching the PubMed database. The pooled relative risks (RRs) and corresponding 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using fixed- or random effects models as indicated by heterogeneity tests. Generalized least squares trend test was used to assess dose-response relationships. Results A total of 28 studies, 15 on shift work, 7 on short sleep duration, 3 on flight attendants, and 6 on light at night were included in the analysis. The combined analysis suggested a significantly positive association between circadian disruption and BrCA risk (RR = 1.14; 95 % CI 1.08-1.21). Separate analyses showed that the RR for BrCA was 1.19 (95 % CI 1.08-1.32) for shift work, 1.120 (95 % CI 1.119-1.121) for exposure to light at night, 1.56 (95 % CI 1.10-2.21) for employment as a flight attendant, and 0.96 (95 % CI 0.86-1.06) for short sleep duration. A dose-response analysis showed that each 10-year increment of shift work was associated with 16 % higher risk of BrCA (95 % CI 1.06-1.27) based on selected case-control studies. No significant dose-response effects of exposure to light at night and sleep deficiency were found on BrCA risk. Conclusions Our meta-analysis demonstrates that circadian disruption is associated with an increased BrCA risk in women. This association varied by specific sources of circadian disrupting exposures, and a dose-response relationship remains uncertain. Therefore, future rigorous prospective studies are needed to confirm these relationships.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Many studies report an association between shift work exposure and increased breast cancer risk.
“That said, many studies have reported an association between shift work exposure and increased risk of breast cancer [59,60].”
From Shift Work: Disrupted Circadian Rhythms and Sleep—Implications for Health and Well-being (2017) · cites this paper as [59]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 63 · Cited by 165
- Authors
- He, C., Anand, S. T., Ebell, M. H., Vena, J. E., & Robb, S. W.
- Affiliations
- University of Georgia (US)
- Medical University of South Carolina (US)
- Corresponding author
- Robb, Sara Wagner
- Venue
- International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health
- Published
- 2014-09-27
- Volume
- 88
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 533-547
- ISSN
- 0340-0131 (ISSN-L)
- 1432-1246
- OpenAlex
- W2043538134
- Cited by
- 165
- References
- 63
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 19 · 2018: 19 · 2017: 26 · 2016: 15 · 2015: 14 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 2.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Circadian rhythm and melatonin
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Risks and Factors
- Keywords
- circadian rhythm disruption, breast cancer risk, shift work, short sleep duration, flight attendants, light at night, circadian rhythm, dose-response relationship, women
- MeSH terms
- Breast Neoplasms, Female, Humans, Risk Factors, Time Factors, Work Schedule Tolerance, Occupational Exposure, Photoperiod, Sleep Disorders, Circadian Rhythm
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review