The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Etiology of Hormone Receptor–Defined Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Literature
Open accessAbstract
Breast cancers classified by estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PR) expression have different clinical, pathologic, and molecular features. We examined existing evidence from the epidemiologic literature as to whether breast cancers stratified by hormone receptor status are also etiologically distinct diseases. Despite limited statistical power and nonstandardized receptor assays, in aggregate, the critically evaluated studies (n = 31) suggest that the etiology of hormone receptor–defined breast cancers may be heterogeneous. Reproduction-related exposures tended to be associated with increased risk of ER-positive but not ER-negative tumors. Nulliparity and delayed childbearing were more consistently associated with increased cancer risk for ER-positive than ER-negative tumors, and early menarche was more consistently associated with ER-positive/PR-positive than ER-negative/PR-negative tumors. Postmenopausal obesity was also more consistently associated with increased risk of hormone receptor–positive than hormone receptor–negative tumors, possibly reflecting increased estrogen synthesis in adipose stores and greater bioavailability. Published data are insufficient to suggest that exogenous estrogen use (oral contraceptives or hormone replacement therapy) increase risk of hormone-sensitive tumors. Risks associated with breast-feeding, alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, family history of breast cancer, or premenopausal obesity did not differ by receptor status. Large population-based studies of determinants of hormone receptor–defined breast cancers defined using state-of-the-art quantitative immunostaining methods are needed to clarify the role of ER/PR expression in breast cancer etiology.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Breastfeeding and maternal health outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Chowdhury, R., Sinha, B., Sankar, M. J., Taneja, S., Bhandari, N., Rollins, N., Bahl, R., & Martines, J. (2015) · Acta Paediatrica · doi:10.1111/apa.13102 · Cited by 1,143
Epidemiology of basal-like breast cancer
Millikan, R. C., Newman, B., Tse, C.-K., Moorman, P. G., Conway, K., Smith, L. V., Labbok, M. H., Geradts, J., Bensen, J. T., Jackson, S., et al. (2008) · Breast Cancer Research and Treatment · doi:10.1007/s10549-007-9632-6 · Cited by 886
Yang, X. R., Chang-Claude, J., Goode, E. L., Couch, F. J., Nevanlinna, H., Milne, R. L., Gaudet, M., Schmidt, M. K., Broeks, A., Cox, A., et al. (2011) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djq526 · Cited by 691
Self-citationNeuhouser, M. L., Aragaki, A. K., Prentice, R. L., Manson, J. E., Chlebowski, R., Carty, C. L., Ochs-Balcom, H. M., Thomson, C. A., Caan, B. J., Tinker, L. F., et al. (2015) · JAMA Oncology · doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.1546 · Cited by 630
Li, N., Deng, Y., Zhou, L., Tian, T., Yang, S., Wu, Y., Zheng, Y., Zhai, Z., Hao, Q., Song, D., et al. (2019) · Journal of Hematology & Oncology · doi:10.1186/s13045-019-0828-0 · Cited by 462
Metadata
- Authors
- Althuis, M. D., Fergenbaum, J. H., Garcia-Closas, M., Brinton, L. A., Madigan, M. P., & Sherman, M. E.
- Venue
- Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
- Published
- 2004-10-01
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1558-1568
- ISSN
- 1055-9965 (ISSN-L)
- 1538-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2171697357
- Cited by
- 628
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Etiology of Hormone Receptor–Defined Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Literature. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1158/1055-9965.1558.13.10
- The paper
- Althuis, M. D., Fergenbaum, J. H., Garcia-Closas, M., Brinton, L. A., Madigan, M. P., & Sherman, M. E. (2004). Etiology of Hormone Receptor–Defined Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.1558.13.10
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.