Bladder cancer risk as modified by family history and smoking

Jie Lin, Margaret R. Spitz, Colin P. Dinney, Carol J. Etzel, H. Barton Grossman, Xifeng Wu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

35 Scopus citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND. The familial risk of bladder cancer (BC) is not well understood and, to date, little attention has been paid to the joint effect of smoking and family history in modifying the risk of BC. The authors investigated the role of family history in association with the risk of BC. METHODS. Case and control probands were identified as part of an on-going BC case-control study. The relative risk associated with a family history of BC was estimated. RESULTS. In total, 713 cases and 658 controls were included. In a case-control analysis, compared with individuals who never smoked and who had no family history of BC, probands who had smoked and who also had a positive family history were at 5.31-fold increased risk of BC (P for interaction = .04). The 713 case probands and the 658 controls reported 5160 and 4816 first-degree relatives, respectively. Compared with never-smoking relatives who had probands diagnosed with BC at an older age (age >65 years), ever-smoking relatives who had probands diagnosed at a younger age (ages 40-65 years) showed a 6.89-fold (95% confidence interval, from 2.25-fold to 21.12-fold) increased risk. Similar results were obtained for the joint effects of family history of BC and smoking. CONCLUSIONS. The current results indicated that a positive family history of BC may have interacted with smoking habits to increase the risk of BC in the study population.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)705-711
Number of pages7
JournalCancer
Volume107
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 15 2006

Keywords

  • Bladder cancer
  • Familial risk
  • Proband
  • Smoking

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Bladder cancer risk as modified by family history and smoking'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this