METHODS: A face-to-face interview using a validated questionnaire was conducted with 324 Sarawakian women aged 40-65 to determine the mean age of menopause and perceptions and experiences of menopause among these women.
RESULTS: The mean age ± standard deviation of the women was 51.37 ± 5.91 years. Ninety (27.8%) participants were premenopausal, 124 (38.5%) perimenopausal and 110 (33.7%) postmenopausal. The majority of these women (228; 70.4%) were local indigenous inhabitants of Sarawak. The findings show that 22.5% of the participants agreed that problems during menopause are a natural process. While 21.9% of the participants suggested that menopause should be treated medically, 32.3% argued that natural approaches for menopause symptoms are better than hormonal treatments. Seventy-five per cent of the women agreed that the absence of menses after menopause is a relief; meanwhile, 61.2% stated that menopause causes unpleasant symptoms. Notably, 51.7% were not sure whether women become less sexually attractive after menopause, and 51.1% were uncertain as to whether they feel less of a woman following menopause. Finally, 81.7% of participants were unsure if sexual activity is more enjoyable after menopause, and 71.9% were uncertain whether changes in life during menopause are more stressful. Among the different menopausal stages, the premenopausal group of women were noted to have more positive perceptions of menopause compared to the peri- and postmenopausal women. The study also observed that women with a better educational background generally had more positive perceptions of menopause.
CONCLUSIONS: The women's perceptions of menopause in this study were found to correspond to those in other studies on Asian women. Women with higher levels of education and premenopausal women comparatively expressed more positive opinions regarding menopause. Lastly, most of the women noted that menopausal symptoms are unpleasant, but that the absence of menses after menopause is a relief.
METHOD: A historical cohort of 986 premenopausal, and 1123 postmenopausal, parous breast cancer patients diagnosed from 2001 to 2012 in University Malaya Medical Centre were included in the analyses. Time since LCB was categorized into quintiles. Multivariable Cox regression was used to determine whether time since LCB was associated with survival following breast cancer, adjusting for demographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics.
RESULTS: Premenopausal breast cancer patients with the most recent childbirth (LCB quintile 1) were younger, more likely to present with unfavorable prognostic profiles and had the lowest 5-year overall survival (OS) (66.9; 95% CI 60.2-73.6%), compared to women with longer duration since LCB (quintile 2 thru 5). In univariable analysis, time since LCB was inversely associated with risk of mortality and the hazard ratio for LCB quintile 2, 3, 4, and 5 versus quintile 1 were 0.53 (95% CI 0.36-0.77), 0.49 (95% CI 0.33-0.75), 0.61 (95% CI 0.43-0.85), and 0.64 (95% CI 0.44-0.93), respectively; P trend = 0.016. However, this association was attenuated substantially following adjustment for age at diagnosis and other prognostic factors. Similarly, postmenopausal breast cancer patients with the most recent childbirth were also more likely to present with unfavorable disease profiles. Compared to postmenopausal breast cancer patients in LCB quintile 1, patients in quintile 5 had a higher risk of mortality. This association was not significant following multivariable adjustment.
CONCLUSION: Time since LCB is not independently associated with survival in premenopausal or postmenopausal breast cancers. The apparent increase in risks of mortality in premenopausal breast cancer patients with a recent childbirth, and postmenopausal patients with longer duration since LCB, appear to be largely explained by their age at diagnosis.
METHODS: We further investigated the association of rs10235235 with breast cancer risk in a large case control study of 47,346 cases and 47,570 controls from 52 studies participating in the Breast Cancer Association Consortium. Genotyping of rs10235235 was conducted using a custom Illumina Infinium array. Stratified analyses were conducted to determine whether this association was modified by age at diagnosis, ethnicity, age at menarche or tumor characteristics.
RESULTS: We confirmed the association of rs10235235 with breast cancer risk for women of European ancestry but found no evidence that this association differed with age at diagnosis. Heterozygote and homozygote odds ratios (ORs) were OR = 0.98 (95% CI 0.94, 1.01; P = 0.2) and OR = 0.80 (95% CI 0.69, 0.93; P = 0.004), respectively (P(trend) = 0.02). There was no evidence of effect modification by tumor characteristics. rs10235235 was, however, associated with age at menarche in controls (P(trend) = 0.005) but not cases (P(trend) = 0.97). Consequently the association between rs10235235 and breast cancer risk differed according to age at menarche (P(het) = 0.02); the rare allele of rs10235235 was associated with a reduction in breast cancer risk for women who had their menarche age ≥15 years (OR(het) = 0.84, 95% CI 0.75, 0.94; OR(hom) = 0.81, 95% CI 0.51, 1.30; P(trend) = 0.002) but not for those who had their menarche age ≤11 years (OR(het) = 1.06, 95% CI 0.95, 1.19, OR(hom) = 1.07, 95% CI 0.67, 1.72; P(trend) = 0.29).
CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge rs10235235 is the first single nucleotide polymorphism to be associated with both breast cancer risk and age at menarche consistent with the well-documented association between later age at menarche and a reduction in breast cancer risk. These associations are likely mediated via an effect on circulating hormone levels.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the association of premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer risk with fat and fat subtypes intake.
METHODOLOGY: This is a population based case-control study conducted in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia from January 2006 to December 2007. Food intake pattern was collected from 382 breast cancer patients and 382 control group via an interviewer-administered food frequency questionnaire. Logistic regression was used to compute odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and a broad range of potential confounders was included in analysis.
RESULTS: This study showed that both premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer risk did not increase significantly with greater intake of total fat [quartile (Q) 4 versus Q1 OR=0.76, 95% CI, 0.23-2.45 and OR=1.36, 95% CI, 0.30-3.12], saturated fat (ORQ4 to Q1=1.43, 95% CI, 0.51-3.98 and ORQ4 to Q1=1.75, 95% CI, 0.62-3.40), monounsaturated fat (ORQ4 to Q1=0.96, 95% CI, 0.34-1.72 and ORQ4 to Q1=1.74, 95% CI, 0.22-2.79), polyunsaturated fat (ORQ4 to Q1=0.64, 95% CI, 0.23-1.73 and ORQ4 to Q1=0.74, 95% CI, 0.39-1.81), n-3 polyunsaturated fat (ORQ4 to Q1=1.10, 95% CI, 0.49-2.48 and ORQ4 to Q1=0.78, 95% CI, 0.28-2.18), n-6 polyunsaturated fat (ORQ4 to Q1=0.67, 95% CI, 0.24-1.84 and ORQ4 to Q1=0.71, 95% CI, 0.29-1.04) or energy intake (ORQ4 to Q1=1.52, 95% CI, 0.68-3.38 and ORQ4 to Q1=2.21, 95% CI, 0.93-3.36).
CONCLUSION: Total fat and fat subtypes were not associated with pre- and postmenopausal breast cancer risk after controlling for age, other breast cancer risk factors and energy intake. Despite the lack of association, the effects of total fat and fat subtypes intake during premenopausal years towards postmenopausal breast cancer risk still warrant investigation.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer risk with dietary carbohydrate, fiber and sugar intake.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This population based case-control study was conducted in Malaysia with 382 breast cancer patients and 382 controls. Food intake pattern was assessed via an interviewer-administered food frequency questionnaire. Logistic regression was used to compute odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and a broad range of potential confounders were included in analysis.
RESULTS: A significant two fold increased risk of breast cancer among premenopausal (OR Q4 to Q1=1.93, 95%CI: 1.53-2.61, p-trend=0.001) and postmenopausal (OR Q4 to Q1=1.87, 95%CI: 1.03-2.61, p-trend=0.045) women was observed in the highest quartile of sugar. A higher intake of dietary fiber was associated with a significantly lower breast cancer risk among both premenopausal (OR Q4 to Q1=0.31, 95%CI: 0.12-0.79, p-trend=0.009) and postmenopausal (OR Q4 to Q1=0.23, 95%CI: 0.07-0.76, p-trend=0.031) women.
CONCLUSIONS: Sugar and dietary fiber intake were independently related to pre- and postmenopausal breast cancer risk. However, no association was observed for dietary carbohydrate intake.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: 300 healthy women were recruited comprising 150 premenopausal and 150 postmenopausal women, aged from 20-76 years. All women were subjected to a pelvic ultrasonograph and were confirmed to be free from ovarian pathology on recruitment. Serum HE4 levels were determined by chemiluminescent microparticle immunoassay (CMIA, Abbott Architect). The reference intervals were determined following CLSI guidelines (C28-A2) using a non-parametric method.
RESULTS: The upper limits of the 95th percentile reference interval (90%CI) for all the women collectively were 64.6 pmol/L, and 58.4 pmol/L for premenopausal) and 69.0 pmol/L for postmenopausal. The concentration of HE4 was noted to increase with age especially in women who were more than 50 years old. We also noted that our proposed reference limit was lower compared to the level given by manufacturer Abbott Architect HE4 kit insert (58.4 vs 70 pmol/L for premenopausal group and 69.0 vs 140 pmol/L in the postmenopausal group). The study also showed a significant difference in HE4 concentrations between ethnic groups (Malays and Indians). The levels of HE4 in Indians appeared higher than in Malays (p<0.05), while no significant differences were noted between the Malays and Chinese ethnic groups.
CONCLUSIONS: More data are needed to establish a reference interval that will better represent the multiethnic Malaysian population. Probably a larger sampling size of equal representation of the Malay, Chinese, Indians as well as the other native ethnic communities will give us a greater confidence on whether genetics plays a role in reference interval determination.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: We examined cross-sectional differences in MD by age and menopausal status in over 11,000 breast-cancer-free women aged 35-85 years, from 40 ethnicity- and location-specific population groups across 22 countries in the International Consortium on Mammographic Density (ICMD). MD was read centrally using a quantitative method (Cumulus) and its square-root metrics were analysed using meta-analysis of group-level estimates and linear regression models of pooled data, adjusted for body mass index, reproductive factors, mammogram view, image type, and reader. In all, 4,534 women were premenopausal, and 6,481 postmenopausal, at the time of mammography. A large age-adjusted difference in percent MD (PD) between post- and premenopausal women was apparent (-0.46 cm [95% CI: -0.53, -0.39]) and appeared greater in women with lower breast cancer risk profiles; variation across population groups due to heterogeneity (I2) was 16.5%. Among premenopausal women, the √PD difference per 10-year increase in age was -0.24 cm (95% CI: -0.34, -0.14; I2 = 30%), reflecting a compositional change (lower dense area and higher non-dense area, with no difference in breast area). In postmenopausal women, the corresponding difference in √PD (-0.38 cm [95% CI: -0.44, -0.33]; I2 = 30%) was additionally driven by increasing breast area. The study is limited by different mammography systems and its cross-sectional rather than longitudinal nature.
CONCLUSIONS: Declines in MD with increasing age are present premenopausally, continue postmenopausally, and are most pronounced over the menopausal transition. These effects were highly consistent across diverse groups of women worldwide, suggesting that they result from an intrinsic biological, likely hormonal, mechanism common to women. If cumulative breast density is a key determinant of breast cancer risk, younger ages may be the more critical periods for lifestyle modifications aimed at breast density and breast cancer risk reduction.