Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges

Publication Date:
2018-02-16
Publisher:
BMJ Publishing Group
Print ISSN:
1351-0711
Electronic ISSN:
1470-7926
Topics:
Medicine
Published by:
_version_ 1836398797863780354
autor Fritschi, L., Valerie Gross, J., Wild, U., Heyworth, J. S., Glass, D. C., Erren, T. C.
beschreibung Objectives In 2007, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified shift work involving circadian disruption (CD) as probably carcinogenic to humans. Circadian disruption could be conceptualised as the overlap of activity, such as work, with an individual’s biological night. The latter can be approximated from a worker’s chronotype (or morning/evening preference). Few previous studies have taken chronotype into account when assessing CD caused by shift work. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that women working during their biological night would be at increased risk of breast cancer. Methods We used data from our case–control study of breast cancer to investigate associations between shift work involving CD and breast cancer risks. Previously, we had assumed that everyone working in jobs which involved work for two or more shifts between midnight and 05:00 hours was equally exposed to CD. In the present analyses, we reclassified as unexposed those who had a late chronotype in which their preferred bedtime was 2 hours after the end of their shift. Results Only 30 of 1385 night jobs changed classification and the overall finding (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.41) was not different to the original finding when chronotype was not considered. Conclusions We found virtually no difference between our new and old classifications of exposure. However, we were not able to calculate the total number of chronodisrupted shifts over a lifetime in order to assess dose and nor were we able to determine how many women were exposed to CD when doing shifts which began before midnight. Our first practical application highlights challenges for future chronobiology-based research.
citation_standardnr 6166731
datenlieferant ipn_articles
feed_id 7402
feed_publisher BMJ Publishing Group
feed_publisher_url http://www.bmj.com/
insertion_date 2018-02-16
journaleissn 1470-7926
journalissn 1351-0711
publikationsjahr_anzeige 2018
publikationsjahr_facette 2018
publikationsjahr_intervall 7984:2015-2019
publikationsjahr_sort 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
quelle Occupational and Environmental Medicine
relation http://oem.bmj.com/cgi/content/short/75/3/231?rss=1
search_space articles
shingle_author_1 Fritschi, L., Valerie Gross, J., Wild, U., Heyworth, J. S., Glass, D. C., Erren, T. C.
shingle_author_2 Fritschi, L., Valerie Gross, J., Wild, U., Heyworth, J. S., Glass, D. C., Erren, T. C.
shingle_author_3 Fritschi, L., Valerie Gross, J., Wild, U., Heyworth, J. S., Glass, D. C., Erren, T. C.
shingle_author_4 Fritschi, L., Valerie Gross, J., Wild, U., Heyworth, J. S., Glass, D. C., Erren, T. C.
shingle_catch_all_1 Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
Objectives In 2007, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified shift work involving circadian disruption (CD) as probably carcinogenic to humans. Circadian disruption could be conceptualised as the overlap of activity, such as work, with an individual’s biological night. The latter can be approximated from a worker’s chronotype (or morning/evening preference). Few previous studies have taken chronotype into account when assessing CD caused by shift work. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that women working during their biological night would be at increased risk of breast cancer. Methods We used data from our case–control study of breast cancer to investigate associations between shift work involving CD and breast cancer risks. Previously, we had assumed that everyone working in jobs which involved work for two or more shifts between midnight and 05:00 hours was equally exposed to CD. In the present analyses, we reclassified as unexposed those who had a late chronotype in which their preferred bedtime was 2 hours after the end of their shift. Results Only 30 of 1385 night jobs changed classification and the overall finding (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.41) was not different to the original finding when chronotype was not considered. Conclusions We found virtually no difference between our new and old classifications of exposure. However, we were not able to calculate the total number of chronodisrupted shifts over a lifetime in order to assess dose and nor were we able to determine how many women were exposed to CD when doing shifts which began before midnight. Our first practical application highlights challenges for future chronobiology-based research.
Fritschi, L., Valerie Gross, J., Wild, U., Heyworth, J. S., Glass, D. C., Erren, T. C.
BMJ Publishing Group
1351-0711
13510711
1470-7926
14707926
shingle_catch_all_2 Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
Objectives In 2007, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified shift work involving circadian disruption (CD) as probably carcinogenic to humans. Circadian disruption could be conceptualised as the overlap of activity, such as work, with an individual’s biological night. The latter can be approximated from a worker’s chronotype (or morning/evening preference). Few previous studies have taken chronotype into account when assessing CD caused by shift work. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that women working during their biological night would be at increased risk of breast cancer. Methods We used data from our case–control study of breast cancer to investigate associations between shift work involving CD and breast cancer risks. Previously, we had assumed that everyone working in jobs which involved work for two or more shifts between midnight and 05:00 hours was equally exposed to CD. In the present analyses, we reclassified as unexposed those who had a late chronotype in which their preferred bedtime was 2 hours after the end of their shift. Results Only 30 of 1385 night jobs changed classification and the overall finding (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.41) was not different to the original finding when chronotype was not considered. Conclusions We found virtually no difference between our new and old classifications of exposure. However, we were not able to calculate the total number of chronodisrupted shifts over a lifetime in order to assess dose and nor were we able to determine how many women were exposed to CD when doing shifts which began before midnight. Our first practical application highlights challenges for future chronobiology-based research.
Fritschi, L., Valerie Gross, J., Wild, U., Heyworth, J. S., Glass, D. C., Erren, T. C.
BMJ Publishing Group
1351-0711
13510711
1470-7926
14707926
shingle_catch_all_3 Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
Objectives In 2007, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified shift work involving circadian disruption (CD) as probably carcinogenic to humans. Circadian disruption could be conceptualised as the overlap of activity, such as work, with an individual’s biological night. The latter can be approximated from a worker’s chronotype (or morning/evening preference). Few previous studies have taken chronotype into account when assessing CD caused by shift work. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that women working during their biological night would be at increased risk of breast cancer. Methods We used data from our case–control study of breast cancer to investigate associations between shift work involving CD and breast cancer risks. Previously, we had assumed that everyone working in jobs which involved work for two or more shifts between midnight and 05:00 hours was equally exposed to CD. In the present analyses, we reclassified as unexposed those who had a late chronotype in which their preferred bedtime was 2 hours after the end of their shift. Results Only 30 of 1385 night jobs changed classification and the overall finding (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.41) was not different to the original finding when chronotype was not considered. Conclusions We found virtually no difference between our new and old classifications of exposure. However, we were not able to calculate the total number of chronodisrupted shifts over a lifetime in order to assess dose and nor were we able to determine how many women were exposed to CD when doing shifts which began before midnight. Our first practical application highlights challenges for future chronobiology-based research.
Fritschi, L., Valerie Gross, J., Wild, U., Heyworth, J. S., Glass, D. C., Erren, T. C.
BMJ Publishing Group
1351-0711
13510711
1470-7926
14707926
shingle_catch_all_4 Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
Objectives In 2007, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified shift work involving circadian disruption (CD) as probably carcinogenic to humans. Circadian disruption could be conceptualised as the overlap of activity, such as work, with an individual’s biological night. The latter can be approximated from a worker’s chronotype (or morning/evening preference). Few previous studies have taken chronotype into account when assessing CD caused by shift work. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that women working during their biological night would be at increased risk of breast cancer. Methods We used data from our case–control study of breast cancer to investigate associations between shift work involving CD and breast cancer risks. Previously, we had assumed that everyone working in jobs which involved work for two or more shifts between midnight and 05:00 hours was equally exposed to CD. In the present analyses, we reclassified as unexposed those who had a late chronotype in which their preferred bedtime was 2 hours after the end of their shift. Results Only 30 of 1385 night jobs changed classification and the overall finding (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.41) was not different to the original finding when chronotype was not considered. Conclusions We found virtually no difference between our new and old classifications of exposure. However, we were not able to calculate the total number of chronodisrupted shifts over a lifetime in order to assess dose and nor were we able to determine how many women were exposed to CD when doing shifts which began before midnight. Our first practical application highlights challenges for future chronobiology-based research.
Fritschi, L., Valerie Gross, J., Wild, U., Heyworth, J. S., Glass, D. C., Erren, T. C.
BMJ Publishing Group
1351-0711
13510711
1470-7926
14707926
shingle_title_1 Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
shingle_title_2 Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
shingle_title_3 Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
shingle_title_4 Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
timestamp 2025-06-30T23:32:47.838Z
titel Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
titel_suche Shift work that involves circadian disruption and breast cancer: a first application of chronobiological theory and the consequent challenges
topic WW-YZ
uid ipn_articles_6166731