A meta-analysis of consanguinity and breast cancer
- 33 Downloads
There have been various publications stating that consanguinity both increases and decreases the risk of breast cancer.
The objective of this study was to determine the impact of consanguinity upon breast cancer. We conducted a systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis.
Eligible studies were identified on Medline and EMBASE updated to the 19 of September 2017. Studies with sufficient comparative data were included in a meta-analysis. Analyses were carried out using RevMan software.
Three comparative studies with a total of 317 individuals with breast cancer and 1459 controls. Reviewing the literature demonstrated conflicting conclusions of the influence of consanguinity upon breast cancer. The meta-analysis showed that there were no statistically significant associations between consanguinity and breast cancer though there was a trend protection from a history of consanguinity.
Though there is limited literature published on the effects of parental consanguinity, the available data does not demonstrate that it is a risk factor for breast cancer.
KeywordsBreast cancer Consanguinity Inbreeding Incest Risk
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent was not required for this study.
- 1.WHO Global Health Estimates 2013Google Scholar
- 12.Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, Petersen J, Welch V, Losos M, Tugwell P. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. 2017. Available at http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp Accessed Oct 2017
- 15.Medimegh I, Troudi W, Omrane I, Ayari H, Uhrhummer N, Majoul H, Benayed F, Mezlini A, Bignon YJ, Sibille C, Elgaaied AB (2015) Consanguinity protecting effect against breast cancer among Tunisian women: analysis of BRCA1 haplotypes. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 16(9):4051–4055CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar