This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

H. M. Lemon, MD
University of Nebraska Medical Center

H. T. Lynch, MD
Creighton University School of Medicine Omaha

JAMA. 1986;256(17):2346.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

To the Editor.—

The report of Lipnick et al¹ on breast cancer incidence and contraceptive use in 70 151 premenopausal nurses showed that the majority of younger women (aged <39 years) with cancer had used contraceptives. Age-specific annual breast cancer incidence calculated from their Table 4 was significantly increased in these age groups, compared with US white females reported by the National Cancer Institute² (Table). In such a large population sample, one might expect that some of the confounding variables that increase the risk of breast cancer, such as genetic predisposition or benign breast disease, would not have undergone positive selection bias.

In another recent report using the same data base, Pathak et al³ found that low parity increased the risk of breast cancer compared with nulliparous nurses; with increasing parity of three or more pregnancies (nurses aged >39 years), the risks became similar for the childless . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?