Chronotype and postmenopausal breast cancer risk among women in the California Teachers Study

ABSTRACT

Chronotype is the behavioral manifestation of an individual’s underlying circadian rhythm, generally characterized by one’s propensity to sleep at a particular time during the 24 hour cycle. Evening chronotypes (“night owls”) generally suffer from worse physical and mental health compared to morning chronotypes (“morning larks”) – for reasons that have yet to be explained. One hypothesis is that evening chronotypes may be more susceptible to circadian disruption, a condition where the coordinated timing of biologic processes breaks down. The role of chronotype as an independent or modifying risk factor for cancer has not been widely explored. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the risk of breast cancer associated with chronotype in a case-control study nested within the California Teachers Study (CTS) cohort. The study population consisted of 39686 post-menopausal CTS participants who provided information on chronotype by completing a questionnaire in 2012–2013. 2719 cases of primary invasive breast cancer diagnosed from 1995/1996 through completion of the chronotype questionnaire were identified by linkage of the CTS to the California Cancer Registry. 36967 CTS participants who had remained cancer-free during this same time period served as controls. Chronotype was ascertained by responses to an abbreviated version of the Horne-Ostberg Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ) and was characterized into five categories: definite morning, more morning than evening, neither morning or evening, more evening than morning, definite evening. Multivariable unconditional logistic regression analyses were performed to estimate the odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) for each of the chronotypes, adjusted for established breast cancer risk factors. Compared to definite morning types, definite evening types had an increased risk of breast cancer with elevated ORs that were statistically significant in both the crude (OR = 1.24, 95% CI: 1.10–1.40) and fully-adjusted models (OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.06–1.35). The risk estimates in the fully-adjusted model for all other chronotypes did not significantly differ from one. These results suggest that evening chronotype may be an independent risk factor for breast cancer among a population of women who are not known to have engaged in any substantial night shift work. Further research in other populations of non-shift workers is warranted.

KEYWORDS:

• Chronotype
• breast cancer risk
• circadian disruption
• case-control
• circadian rhythm

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the California Teachers Study Steering Committee that is responsible for the formation and maintenance of the Study within which this research was conducted. A full list of California Teachers Study team members is available at https://www.calteachersstudy.org/team. We also express our appreciation to all the participants in the California Teachers Study and to the phlebotomists, the researchers, analysts and staff who have contributed to the success of this research, including Christine Duffy and Jane Sullivan-Halley.

Data availability statement

All of the data associated with this publication and in the California Teachers Study are available for research use. The California Teachers Study welcomes all such inquiries and encourages individuals to visit https://www.calteachersstudy.org/for-researchers.

Declaration of interest statement

None of the authors has any financial conflicts of interest. The California Teachers Study and the research reported in this publication were supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under award number U01-CA199277; P30-CA033572; P30-CA023100; UM1-CA164917; R01-CA077398; and R01 CA207020. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institutes of Health.

The collection of cancer incidence data used in the California Teachers Study was supported by the California Department of Public Health pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 103885; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Program of Cancer Registries, under cooperative agreement 5NU58DP006344; the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program under contract HHSN261201800032I awarded to the University of California, San Francisco, contract HHSN261201800015I awarded to the University of Southern California, and contract HHSN261201800009I awarded to the Public Health Institute. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official views of the State of California, Department of Public Health, the National Cancer Institute, the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention or their Contractors and Subcontractors, or the Regents of the University of California, or any of its programs.

Supplementary Material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed publisher’s website

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute [P30-CA023100, P30-CA033572, R01 CA207020, R01-CA077398, U01-CA199277, UM1-CA164917].