Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015 Apr 8;24(6):962–968. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-1429

Table 4.

Multivariable* Relative Risks of Breast Cancer by ER/PR/AR Status According to adult body size and physical activity in the Nurses’ Health Study

ER+PR+AR+
(n=1,163)
ER+PR+AR−
(n=181)
ER+PR−AR+
(n=260)
ER+PR−AR−
(n=75)
ER−PR−AR+
(n=197)
ER−PR−AR−
(n=205)
BMI (kg/m2)per 5 increment 1.15 (1.08, 1.23) 1.23 (1.04, 1.45) 0.88 (0.75, 1.03) 0.92 (0.70, 1.22) 1.08 (0.92, 1.28) 1.19 (1.01, 1.39)
Weight change: per 5 kg change 1.06 (1.03, 1.08) 1.07 (1.00, 1.14) 0.95 (0.89, 1.01) 1.00 (0.90, 1.11) 1.05 (0.99, 1.12) 1.07 (1.01, 1.14)
5 hours of brisk walking per week 0.81 (0.66, 0.99) 0.73 (0.42, 1.26) 1.01 (0.67, 1.51) 0.43 (0.15, 1.27) 0.78 (0.47, 1.31) 0.72 (0.42, 1.23)
*

MV-Adjusted for age at menarche, body mass index at age 18 years, height, parity and age at first birth, alcohol intake, postmenopausal hormone use, age at menopause, family history of breast cancer, and history of benign breast disease. For the weight change analysis, the cases numbers were 1,045 ER+PR+AR+, 160 ER+PR+AR−, 228 ER+PR−AR+, 179 ER−PR−AR+, 184 ER−PR−AR−, and 70 ER+PR−AR− tumors. The corresponding case numbers for the physical activity analysis were 1,162, 177, 233, 180,186, and 68.

For the pair-wise comparisons, the associations were only statistically significantly different between ER+PR−AR+ and each of ER+PR+AR+ (p-value=0.003), ER+PR+AR− (p-value=0.004), and ER−PR−AR− (p-value=0.02).