Search

Between 1968 and 1976 a total of 5162 women volunteers were enrolled into a prospective study conducted on the Island of Guernsey. Up to February 1990 145 women subsequently developed breast cancer. Blood samples were taken at the time of enrollment and prolactin levels were known for 85% of the volunteers. In calculating the relationship between blood prolactin levels and subsequent breast cancer risk, women were excluded if they had a hysterectomy or an oophorectomy or had cancer at any site before enrollment. The final analysis was based on 2596 premenopausal and 1180 naturally postmenopausal women and, of these respectively, there were 71 and 40 volunteers who subsequently developed breast cancer. The total follow-up for these two groups was 49,941 and 22,360 woman-years, respectively. In assessing the relationship between blood prolactin levels and risk of subsequent breast cancer the cohort was divided into quintiles according to prolactin concentration and relative risks (RR) were estimated. In calculating these values possible confounding by age at entry, age at menarche, parity, age at first birth, years since menopause, body build, history of benign breast disease and family history of breast cancer were taken into consideration. There was no significant relation between risk of breast cancer and prolactin in either pre- or postmenopausal women. Hence prolactin appears not to be an important determinant of breast cancer risk.

Single specimens of blood have been taken from over 5000 normal volunteer women in each of two sequential (1967-1976, 1977-1984) population-based studied on the Island of Guernsey. Multivariate analysis was used to determine the relationship between prolactin levels and risk factors in breast cancer in 2591 and 1959 premenopausal women in whom blood prolactin had been measured. In both populations the prolactin concentrations appeared to be log-normally distributed and therefore all analyses have been done on log-transformed data. Initially the variables in the statistical model were age at menarche, ages at first and last baby, parity, ponderosity (Quetelet Index), mammographic pattern (as graded by Wolfe), family history of breast cancer, age, menstrual cycle status, time of day of blood sampling, oral contraceptive use, history of breast feeding and methodological changes in the laboratory measurement of prolactin. Of these variables age at menarche, ages at first and last child and family history of breast cancer were found not to be significant and were excluded from the final model. The main finding to emerge was that after standardizing for all the other variables, prolactin levels in the follicular phase were significantly lower than those found at midcycle or during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. A peak level of prolactin was found at day 12 of the cycle. Increasing parity was related to a steady decrease in prolactin concentration. Increasing ponderosity was associated with an increased prolactin level as was a DY compared to an N1 mammographic pattern. Women with a history of oral contraceptive use had lowered prolactin concentration. All these effects occurred evenly over the menstrual cycle and were generally found for both data sets. Thus body weight, parity and, indirectly, age at first baby might influence breast cancer risk by being associated with changes in blood prolactin concentration.

Serum prolactin (HPr) has been measured in 459 patients 1 day before (HPr-1) and in 433 patients 10 days after (HPr-2) treatment. These came from an unselected sequence of 739 patients with operable breast cancer who had been referred to Guy's Hospital over a period of 5 yr. In addition HPr was measured in 100, or more, women at 3, 6 or 12 months after mastectomy. The median levels of either HPr-1 or HPr-2 were higher in pre-menopausal compared with postmenopausal patients (P = 0.03 and 0.06, respectively). Mastectomy was associated with increased serum HPr in both pre- and post-menopausal patients (P less than 0.001 in both cases). Average levels at 3 months, or after, were similar to those found before treatment. Nulliparous women had a higher median amount of HPr-1 than parous which was significant in premenopausal patients (P less than 0.008) whilst HPr-2 levels were not related to parity. Thus the rise in HPr associated with surgery was greater in parous than nulliparous women. Prolactin levels were not related to nodal status or tumour size. However, the amounts of HPR-2 were significantly greater in women with histological grade 3 tumours than those with grade 1 or 2. Standardising for either nodal status, tumour size or histological grade seven situations were found in which HPr-1 or HPr-2 levels were of prognostic significance. Although some of these significant associations could be fortuitous all shared a common feature that the least favourable prognosis was associated with the highest HPr levels.

1. Starch block electrophoresis, under standardized conditions, of water-soluble protein hormones from rat anterior pituitary tissue is described. The recovery of four of the five hormones assayed proved to be 90–100%. 2. A pure growth-promoting substance has been isolated by a single run. 3. The maxima of the separated hormone activities do not coincide with the protein peaks, with the exception of somatotrophic hormone (STH). 4. Follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) and interstitial cell stimulating hormone (ICSH) were partially separated. The peaks of both FSH and TSH contained only one major contaminant (ICSH).

Plasma-prolactin was assayed in 115 patients with breast cancer and 115 matched controls. Mean plasma-prolactin levels were 6.0 ± 3.7 ng. per ml. and 5.9 ± 2.9 ng. per ml., respectively. Plasma-prolactin levels were normally distributed in both groups. Plasma levels in 64 members of nine families with a high frequency of breast cancer were irregularly distributed, with a mean prolactin level of 10.4 ± 8.1 ng. per ml. Statistical evaluation demonstrated that breast-cancer patients and controls may be regarded as one population but that the prolactin levels in the high-risk group represent a different population (P

Serum levels of prolactin, progesterone, oestradiol, androstenedione and dehydroepiandrosterone sulphate have been measured in 52 adolescent girls with a family history of breast cancer and 90 girls without such a history. Using conventional statistical tests no significant differences were found in the endocrine status of the two groups.

The amount of urinary epidermal growth factor (EGF) excreted was determined in 350 normal women of whom 37 subsequently developed breast cancer. These were a group of women selected on a case-control basis from 5000 volunteers who had participated in a prospective epidemiological study. Urinary EGF excretion was not correlated with known risk factors such as age at menarche or menopause, age at first or last full-term child or parity. Neither was it associated with day or length of menstrual cycle, breast mammographic parenchymal pattern or the blood concentration of prolactin, dehydroepiandrosterone or its sulphate ester. Univariate analysis indicated that the amount of urinary EGF was significantly correlated with urinary creatinine (P less than 0.001), age (P less than 0.001), urinary androsterone (P less than 0.02) or aetiocholanolone (P less than 0.02), height (P less than 0.05) and weight (P less than 0.05). However, multivariate analysis showed that the amount of urinary EGF was correlated only with creatinine excretion (P less than 0.001) and age (P less than 0.001) and that the significance of the other correlations were probably due to the confounding influence of creatinine.

In each of two population-based studies conducted on the Island of Guernsey between 1967-1976 and 1977-1984, respectively, single specimens of blood were taken from over 5000 normal women. From these two studies there were 1173 and 946 postmenopausal women in whom blood prolactin was determined and multivariate analysis was used to establish the association between blood prolactin concentration and possible determinants of risk of breast cancer. Since prolactin levels were log-normally distributed these analyses were done on log-transformed data. The age at menarche or menopause, age at first or last childbirth, length of reproductive life (i.e. time from menarche to menopause) or post-menopausal life (i.e. time from menopause to time of blood sampling), contraceptive use and history of breast cancer were not significantly associated with blood prolactin concentration. Of significance were age, parity, time of blood sampling and assay drift. Ponderosity (Quetelet's Index) was positively associated with prolactin concentration and this was significant using a one-tail criterion. Women with a mammographic pattern designated DY by Wolfe had significantly higher prolactin levels than those with N1 patterns. However, the main finding to emerge was that after standardizing for all the other variables increasing parity was related to a step-wise reduction in blood prolactin levels. Since this had occurred in women who had had their last child up to 35 years previously it implies this effect is permanent. It could therefore be that the protective effect on breast cancer risk of multiparity and early first pregnancy could be mediated by such a life-long reduction in blood prolactin levels.

An investigation was made of daytime plasma prolactin levels in three groups of women aged 50 to 64 years: (1) 139 women with a family history of breast cancer; (2) 50 women on Rauwolfia treatment for hypertension, and (3) 90 women of a control group. A significant difference in prolactin levels was found between groups 2 and 3 but not between 1 and 3. These findings are considered in relation to the results of a breast cancer screening programme in which the women took part. Here, it was the women with a family history of breast cancer who showed an increased breast cancer risk, whereas the risk in women on Rauwolfia was not significantly higher than expected on the basis of the experience among controls. It is concluded that the role of prolactin in the etiology of breast cancer is still not clear.