Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Jun 4;96(11):1755-9.
doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603760. Epub 2007 Apr 24.

Number of siblings and the risk of solid tumours: a nation-wide study

Affiliations

Number of siblings and the risk of solid tumours: a nation-wide study

A Altieri et al. Br J Cancer. .

Abstract

We analysed the effects of number of siblings on the risk of solid tumours using the Swedish Family-Cancer Database, including population-based information on over 11 million individuals and more than 178,000 cancer patients diagnosed between 1958 and 2004. Incidence rate ratios (RRs), estimated by Poisson regression models, were adjusted for age, sex, birth cohort, area of residence and socioeconomic status. Having eight or more siblings vs none increased the risk of stomach cancer (RR=1.83, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.44-2.34). Anal cancer diagnosed before age 40 showed the strongest association with the total siblings (RR=3.27, 95% CI, 2.04-5.26 for five or more siblings vs none). Endometrial (RR=0.76, 95% CI, 0.70-0.82), testicular (RR=0.71, 95% CI, 0.62-0.82), skin cancer (RR=0.82, 95% CI, 0.69-0.97) and melanoma (RR=0.72, 95% CI, 0.65-0.79) showed strong decreased risks for five or more siblings vs none. Prostate cancer risk for those with five or more older siblings vs none was 1.38 (95% CI, 1.23-1.55). Having five or more younger siblings was most strongly associated with stomach cancer (RR=1.59, 95% CI, 1.29-1.95) and melanoma (RR=0.68, 95% CI, 0.59-0.79). We conclude that sibship characteristics are strong correlates of cancer risk at several sites; plausible interpretations include socioeconomic status.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Altieri A, Castro F, Bermejo JL, Hemminki K (2006a) Association between number of siblings and nervous system tumors suggests an infectious etiology. Neurology 67: 1979–1983 - PubMed
    1. Altieri A, Castro F, Bermejo JL, Hemminki K (2006b) Number of siblings and the risk of lymphoma, leukemia, and myeloma by histopathology. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15: 1281–1286 - PubMed
    1. Andersson SW, Niklasson A, Lapidus L, Hallberg L, Bengtsson C, Hulthen L (2000) Sociodemographic characteristics influencing birth outcome in Sweden, 1908–1930. Birth variables in the Population Study of Women in Gothenburg. J Epidemiol Community Health 54: 269–278 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barba M, McCann SE, Nie J, Vito D, Stranges S, Fuhrman B, Trevisan M, Muti P, Freudenheim JL (2006) Perinatal exposures and breast cancer risk in the Western New York Exposures and Breast Cancer (WEB) Study. Cancer Causes Control 17: 395–401 - PubMed
    1. Beebe-Dimmer JL, Wood Jr DP, Gruber SB, Chilson DM, Zuhlke KA, Claeys GB, Cooney KA (2004) Risk perception and concern among brothers of men with prostate carcinoma. Cancer 100: 1537–1544 - PubMed

Publication types