Cited by 165Circadian rhythm and melatoninSleep and Work-Related FatigueCancer Risks and Factors

Circadian disrupting exposures and breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis

He, Chunla, Anand, Sonia Taj, Ebell, Mark H., Vena, John E., Robb, Sara Wagner·2015·International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health

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

Crossref · 10.1007/s00420-014-0986-x

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

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
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