by Fixated on paternal age research on January 7th, 2007

Fixated on paternal age research

Question

Help answer this question below.

Has anyone read studies of the risks for premenopausal breast cancer that include age of the father and mother at birth? If so, how come this risk factor is virtually unknown by the public? Should it be publicized?

  • Like
  • Report

Answers. 1 helpful answer below.

  • by ChrisDG on January 7th, 2007

    ChrisDG

    OK, you're making me really work for this answer.

    There aren't a large number of publications on the matter. The age matter is normally targetted towards later maternal age at birth increasing risk to the *mother* not the child. Breast Dis. 2005-2006;24:17-35.
    Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2006 Jan;15(1):65-9.
    Gynecol Oncol. 2005 Mar;96(3):583-93.

    However, studies that have come out recently are showing an increased risk of breast cancer to the offspring certainly when paternal age is increased
    BMC Cancer. 2005 Oct 31;5:143. This link is assumed to bedue to increased likelihood of germ cell mutations occurring later in life, since obviously the more exposure to mutagens the immature sperm receive whilst in the scrotum, the greater the likelihood that mutations can be passed on to fertilised offspring.

    A recent paper not yet published on paper also gave indications that there could be increased risk to the offspring of getting receptor positive cancers if maternal age is high, though there was no significant correlation for tumour negative cancers. Since tumour positive cancers are easier to treat with chemotherapy than receptor negative tumours, due to there being more drug targets, this makes the problem less severe, though still worthy of more research.
    Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006 Nov 18; [Epub ahead of print]

    However, it should not be assumed that this evidence is conclusive, as there is equally valid conflicting evidence.
    Cancer Causes Control. 1991 Jan;2(1):31-6. This very large study found no correlation between paternal age at all and the link with maternal age was only very slightly different. Plus this study had far higher numbers of participants, which increases the validity of the results.

    So in answer, I would say that because the research is so conflicting, it will take time before a true and valid conclusion can be reached. One good and valid paper alone does not mean the conclusion is right, because as shown here, there are equally valid studies proving the opposite. Since most studies are very new (1-2 years old mostly) the answer is we don't really now.

    As to the publicity, the risk factors are unnknown by the public because as the moment there can be no definite conclusion drawn. Should it be publicised? I have to say that doing so could cause alarm in certain quarters and perhaps result in a baby boom with women conceiving when they are not ready or don't have the resources to bruing up children simply to "beat the risk". Since we cannot make any definite conclusion, I would say not to stress the information until one way or another a true conclusion is reached. However, I do think the public could be informed that research is being carried out in the area to let them know that risks may be possible, and therefore they can then make an informed decision themselves based on easy to understand valid information made publicly available.

    • Like
    • Report

    14 comments | Post one | Permalink

Want to attach an image to your answer? Click here.

Did this answer your question? If not, then ask a new question or create a poll.

More Questions. Additional questions in this category.

You're reading Has anyone read studies of the risks for premenopausal breast cancer that include age of the father and mother at birth? If so, how come this risk factor is virtually unknown by the public? Should it be publicized?

Follow us on Facebook!

Related Ads