Longitudinal Trends in Mammographic Percent Density and Breast Cancer Risk

Background: Mammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer. However, whether changes in mammographic density are associated with risk remains unclear. Materials and Methods: A study of 372 incident breast cancer cases and 713 matched controls was conducted within the Mayo Clinic mamm...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention biomarkers & prevention, 2007-05, Vol.16 (5), p.921-928
Hauptverfasser: VACHON, Celine M, PANKRATZ, V. Shane, SCOTT, Christopher G, MALONEY, Shaun D, GHOSH, Karthik, BRANDT, Kathleen R, MILANESE, Tia, CARSTON, Michael J, SELLERS, Thomas A
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 928
container_issue 5
container_start_page 921
container_title Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention
container_volume 16
creator VACHON, Celine M
PANKRATZ, V. Shane
SCOTT, Christopher G
MALONEY, Shaun D
GHOSH, Karthik
BRANDT, Kathleen R
MILANESE, Tia
CARSTON, Michael J
SELLERS, Thomas A
description Background: Mammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer. However, whether changes in mammographic density are associated with risk remains unclear. Materials and Methods: A study of 372 incident breast cancer cases and 713 matched controls was conducted within the Mayo Clinic mammography screening practice. Controls were matched on age, exam date, residence, menopause, interval between, and number of mammograms. All serial craniocaudal mammograms 10 years before ascertainment were digitized, and quantitative measures of percent density (PD) were estimated using a thresholding method. Data on potential confounders were abstracted from medical records. Logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate the interactions among PD at earliest mammogram, time from earliest to each serial mammogram, and absolute change in PD between the earliest and subsequent mammograms. Analyses were done separately for PD measures from the ipsilateral and contralateral breast and also by use of hormone therapy (HT). Results: Subjects had an average of five mammograms available, were primarily postmenopausal (83%), and averaged 61 years at the earliest mammogram. Mean PD at earliest mammogram was higher for cases (31%) than controls (27%; ipsilateral side). There was no evidence of an association between change in PD and breast cancer risk by time. Compared with no change, an overall reduction of 10% PD (lowest quartile of change) was associated with an odds ratio of 0.9997 and an increase of 6.5% PD (highest quartile of change) with an odds ratio of 1.002. The same results held within the group of 220 cases and 340 controls never using HT. Among the 124 cases and 337 controls known to use HT during the interval, there was a statistically significant interaction between change in PD and time since the earliest mammogram ( P = 0.01). However, in all groups, the risk associated with the earliest PD remained a stronger predictor of risk than change in PD. Conclusion: We observed no association between change in PD with breast cancer risk among all women and those never using HT. However, the interaction between change in PD and time should be evaluated in other populations. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(5):921–8)
doi_str_mv 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-1047
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70523220</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>19663210</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-d47902566db0f529395495959ddaaf473d8e0df909f45335b1b828aa7a2d9a2d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkMFu1DAQhi0EoqXwCCBfgFPK2M7Y8RGWAkWLqFA5W17b2TUkzmJnhfr2OOyiHtFoNHP4Zn7pI-Q5g0vGsHvDALHRWuLl1c11A7Jh0KoH5Jyh6BqlEB_W_R9zRp6U8gMAlEZ8TM6YQlCSqXPyeT2lbZwPPiY70Nscki80JvrFjuO0zXa_i47ehOxCmun7kEqc76hNnr7LwZaZrmxyIdNvsfx8Sh71dijh2WlekO8frm5Xn5r114_Xq7frxrUAc-NbpYGjlH4DPXItNLYaa3lvbd8q4bsAvteg-xaFwA3bdLyzVlnudW1xQV4d_-7z9OsQymzGWFwYBpvCdChGAXLBOfwXZFpKwdkC4hF0eSolh97scxxtvjMMzGLbLCbNYtJU2wakWWzXuxengMNmDP7-6qS3Ai9PgC3ODn2utmK55zqluWh55V4fuV3c7n7HHIz76zWHEmx2O8OkqfmciT8X9ZSP</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>19663210</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Longitudinal Trends in Mammographic Percent Density and Breast Cancer Risk</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>American Association for Cancer Research</source><creator>VACHON, Celine M ; PANKRATZ, V. Shane ; SCOTT, Christopher G ; MALONEY, Shaun D ; GHOSH, Karthik ; BRANDT, Kathleen R ; MILANESE, Tia ; CARSTON, Michael J ; SELLERS, Thomas A</creator><creatorcontrib>VACHON, Celine M ; PANKRATZ, V. Shane ; SCOTT, Christopher G ; MALONEY, Shaun D ; GHOSH, Karthik ; BRANDT, Kathleen R ; MILANESE, Tia ; CARSTON, Michael J ; SELLERS, Thomas A</creatorcontrib><description>Background: Mammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer. However, whether changes in mammographic density are associated with risk remains unclear. Materials and Methods: A study of 372 incident breast cancer cases and 713 matched controls was conducted within the Mayo Clinic mammography screening practice. Controls were matched on age, exam date, residence, menopause, interval between, and number of mammograms. All serial craniocaudal mammograms 10 years before ascertainment were digitized, and quantitative measures of percent density (PD) were estimated using a thresholding method. Data on potential confounders were abstracted from medical records. Logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate the interactions among PD at earliest mammogram, time from earliest to each serial mammogram, and absolute change in PD between the earliest and subsequent mammograms. Analyses were done separately for PD measures from the ipsilateral and contralateral breast and also by use of hormone therapy (HT). Results: Subjects had an average of five mammograms available, were primarily postmenopausal (83%), and averaged 61 years at the earliest mammogram. Mean PD at earliest mammogram was higher for cases (31%) than controls (27%; ipsilateral side). There was no evidence of an association between change in PD and breast cancer risk by time. Compared with no change, an overall reduction of 10% PD (lowest quartile of change) was associated with an odds ratio of 0.9997 and an increase of 6.5% PD (highest quartile of change) with an odds ratio of 1.002. The same results held within the group of 220 cases and 340 controls never using HT. Among the 124 cases and 337 controls known to use HT during the interval, there was a statistically significant interaction between change in PD and time since the earliest mammogram ( P = 0.01). However, in all groups, the risk associated with the earliest PD remained a stronger predictor of risk than change in PD. Conclusion: We observed no association between change in PD with breast cancer risk among all women and those never using HT. However, the interaction between change in PD and time should be evaluated in other populations. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(5):921–8)</description><identifier>ISSN: 1055-9965</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1538-7755</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-1047</identifier><identifier>PMID: 17507617</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia, PA: American Association for Cancer Research</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Biological and medical sciences ; Breast - anatomy &amp; histology ; breast density ; Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging ; Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology ; Case-Control Studies ; Confounding Factors (Epidemiology) ; Cross-Sectional Studies ; Female ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Logistic Models ; longitudinal ; Longitudinal Studies ; Mammary gland diseases ; mammographic density ; Mammography ; Mass Screening ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Minnesota - epidemiology ; Odds Ratio ; Radiographic Image Enhancement ; Risk Factors ; Time Factors ; Tumors</subject><ispartof>Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers &amp; prevention, 2007-05, Vol.16 (5), p.921-928</ispartof><rights>2007 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-d47902566db0f529395495959ddaaf473d8e0df909f45335b1b828aa7a2d9a2d3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-d47902566db0f529395495959ddaaf473d8e0df909f45335b1b828aa7a2d9a2d3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3357,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=18792342$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17507617$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>VACHON, Celine M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PANKRATZ, V. Shane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SCOTT, Christopher G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MALONEY, Shaun D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GHOSH, Karthik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BRANDT, Kathleen R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MILANESE, Tia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CARSTON, Michael J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SELLERS, Thomas A</creatorcontrib><title>Longitudinal Trends in Mammographic Percent Density and Breast Cancer Risk</title><title>Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers &amp; prevention</title><addtitle>Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev</addtitle><description>Background: Mammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer. However, whether changes in mammographic density are associated with risk remains unclear. Materials and Methods: A study of 372 incident breast cancer cases and 713 matched controls was conducted within the Mayo Clinic mammography screening practice. Controls were matched on age, exam date, residence, menopause, interval between, and number of mammograms. All serial craniocaudal mammograms 10 years before ascertainment were digitized, and quantitative measures of percent density (PD) were estimated using a thresholding method. Data on potential confounders were abstracted from medical records. Logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate the interactions among PD at earliest mammogram, time from earliest to each serial mammogram, and absolute change in PD between the earliest and subsequent mammograms. Analyses were done separately for PD measures from the ipsilateral and contralateral breast and also by use of hormone therapy (HT). Results: Subjects had an average of five mammograms available, were primarily postmenopausal (83%), and averaged 61 years at the earliest mammogram. Mean PD at earliest mammogram was higher for cases (31%) than controls (27%; ipsilateral side). There was no evidence of an association between change in PD and breast cancer risk by time. Compared with no change, an overall reduction of 10% PD (lowest quartile of change) was associated with an odds ratio of 0.9997 and an increase of 6.5% PD (highest quartile of change) with an odds ratio of 1.002. The same results held within the group of 220 cases and 340 controls never using HT. Among the 124 cases and 337 controls known to use HT during the interval, there was a statistically significant interaction between change in PD and time since the earliest mammogram ( P = 0.01). However, in all groups, the risk associated with the earliest PD remained a stronger predictor of risk than change in PD. Conclusion: We observed no association between change in PD with breast cancer risk among all women and those never using HT. However, the interaction between change in PD and time should be evaluated in other populations. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(5):921–8)</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Breast - anatomy &amp; histology</subject><subject>breast density</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology</subject><subject>Case-Control Studies</subject><subject>Confounding Factors (Epidemiology)</subject><subject>Cross-Sectional Studies</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Logistic Models</subject><subject>longitudinal</subject><subject>Longitudinal Studies</subject><subject>Mammary gland diseases</subject><subject>mammographic density</subject><subject>Mammography</subject><subject>Mass Screening</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Minnesota - epidemiology</subject><subject>Odds Ratio</subject><subject>Radiographic Image Enhancement</subject><subject>Risk Factors</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><subject>Tumors</subject><issn>1055-9965</issn><issn>1538-7755</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2007</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkMFu1DAQhi0EoqXwCCBfgFPK2M7Y8RGWAkWLqFA5W17b2TUkzmJnhfr2OOyiHtFoNHP4Zn7pI-Q5g0vGsHvDALHRWuLl1c11A7Jh0KoH5Jyh6BqlEB_W_R9zRp6U8gMAlEZ8TM6YQlCSqXPyeT2lbZwPPiY70Nscki80JvrFjuO0zXa_i47ehOxCmun7kEqc76hNnr7LwZaZrmxyIdNvsfx8Sh71dijh2WlekO8frm5Xn5r114_Xq7frxrUAc-NbpYGjlH4DPXItNLYaa3lvbd8q4bsAvteg-xaFwA3bdLyzVlnudW1xQV4d_-7z9OsQymzGWFwYBpvCdChGAXLBOfwXZFpKwdkC4hF0eSolh97scxxtvjMMzGLbLCbNYtJU2wakWWzXuxengMNmDP7-6qS3Ai9PgC3ODn2utmK55zqluWh55V4fuV3c7n7HHIz76zWHEmx2O8OkqfmciT8X9ZSP</recordid><startdate>20070501</startdate><enddate>20070501</enddate><creator>VACHON, Celine M</creator><creator>PANKRATZ, V. Shane</creator><creator>SCOTT, Christopher G</creator><creator>MALONEY, Shaun D</creator><creator>GHOSH, Karthik</creator><creator>BRANDT, Kathleen R</creator><creator>MILANESE, Tia</creator><creator>CARSTON, Michael J</creator><creator>SELLERS, Thomas A</creator><general>American Association for Cancer Research</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7U1</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20070501</creationdate><title>Longitudinal Trends in Mammographic Percent Density and Breast Cancer Risk</title><author>VACHON, Celine M ; PANKRATZ, V. Shane ; SCOTT, Christopher G ; MALONEY, Shaun D ; GHOSH, Karthik ; BRANDT, Kathleen R ; MILANESE, Tia ; CARSTON, Michael J ; SELLERS, Thomas A</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c400t-d47902566db0f529395495959ddaaf473d8e0df909f45335b1b828aa7a2d9a2d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2007</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Breast - anatomy &amp; histology</topic><topic>breast density</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology</topic><topic>Case-Control Studies</topic><topic>Confounding Factors (Epidemiology)</topic><topic>Cross-Sectional Studies</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Logistic Models</topic><topic>longitudinal</topic><topic>Longitudinal Studies</topic><topic>Mammary gland diseases</topic><topic>mammographic density</topic><topic>Mammography</topic><topic>Mass Screening</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Minnesota - epidemiology</topic><topic>Odds Ratio</topic><topic>Radiographic Image Enhancement</topic><topic>Risk Factors</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><topic>Tumors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>VACHON, Celine M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PANKRATZ, V. Shane</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SCOTT, Christopher G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MALONEY, Shaun D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GHOSH, Karthik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BRANDT, Kathleen R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MILANESE, Tia</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CARSTON, Michael J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SELLERS, Thomas A</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Risk Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers &amp; prevention</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>VACHON, Celine M</au><au>PANKRATZ, V. Shane</au><au>SCOTT, Christopher G</au><au>MALONEY, Shaun D</au><au>GHOSH, Karthik</au><au>BRANDT, Kathleen R</au><au>MILANESE, Tia</au><au>CARSTON, Michael J</au><au>SELLERS, Thomas A</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Longitudinal Trends in Mammographic Percent Density and Breast Cancer Risk</atitle><jtitle>Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers &amp; prevention</jtitle><addtitle>Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev</addtitle><date>2007-05-01</date><risdate>2007</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>921</spage><epage>928</epage><pages>921-928</pages><issn>1055-9965</issn><eissn>1538-7755</eissn><abstract>Background: Mammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer. However, whether changes in mammographic density are associated with risk remains unclear. Materials and Methods: A study of 372 incident breast cancer cases and 713 matched controls was conducted within the Mayo Clinic mammography screening practice. Controls were matched on age, exam date, residence, menopause, interval between, and number of mammograms. All serial craniocaudal mammograms 10 years before ascertainment were digitized, and quantitative measures of percent density (PD) were estimated using a thresholding method. Data on potential confounders were abstracted from medical records. Logistic regression models with generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate the interactions among PD at earliest mammogram, time from earliest to each serial mammogram, and absolute change in PD between the earliest and subsequent mammograms. Analyses were done separately for PD measures from the ipsilateral and contralateral breast and also by use of hormone therapy (HT). Results: Subjects had an average of five mammograms available, were primarily postmenopausal (83%), and averaged 61 years at the earliest mammogram. Mean PD at earliest mammogram was higher for cases (31%) than controls (27%; ipsilateral side). There was no evidence of an association between change in PD and breast cancer risk by time. Compared with no change, an overall reduction of 10% PD (lowest quartile of change) was associated with an odds ratio of 0.9997 and an increase of 6.5% PD (highest quartile of change) with an odds ratio of 1.002. The same results held within the group of 220 cases and 340 controls never using HT. Among the 124 cases and 337 controls known to use HT during the interval, there was a statistically significant interaction between change in PD and time since the earliest mammogram ( P = 0.01). However, in all groups, the risk associated with the earliest PD remained a stronger predictor of risk than change in PD. Conclusion: We observed no association between change in PD with breast cancer risk among all women and those never using HT. However, the interaction between change in PD and time should be evaluated in other populations. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(5):921–8)</abstract><cop>Philadelphia, PA</cop><pub>American Association for Cancer Research</pub><pmid>17507617</pmid><doi>10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-1047</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1055-9965
ispartof Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention, 2007-05, Vol.16 (5), p.921-928
issn 1055-9965
1538-7755
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_70523220
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; American Association for Cancer Research
subjects Adult
Aged
Biological and medical sciences
Breast - anatomy & histology
breast density
Breast Neoplasms - diagnostic imaging
Breast Neoplasms - epidemiology
Case-Control Studies
Confounding Factors (Epidemiology)
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics
Humans
Logistic Models
longitudinal
Longitudinal Studies
Mammary gland diseases
mammographic density
Mammography
Mass Screening
Medical sciences
Middle Aged
Minnesota - epidemiology
Odds Ratio
Radiographic Image Enhancement
Risk Factors
Time Factors
Tumors
title Longitudinal Trends in Mammographic Percent Density and Breast Cancer Risk
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-12T04%3A45%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Longitudinal%20Trends%20in%20Mammographic%20Percent%20Density%20and%20Breast%20Cancer%20Risk&rft.jtitle=Cancer%20epidemiology,%20biomarkers%20&%20prevention&rft.au=VACHON,%20Celine%20M&rft.date=2007-05-01&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=921&rft.epage=928&rft.pages=921-928&rft.issn=1055-9965&rft.eissn=1538-7755&rft_id=info:doi/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-1047&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E19663210%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=19663210&rft_id=info:pmid/17507617&rfr_iscdi=true