Mammographic features associated with interval breast cancers in screening programs.

INTRODUCTION: Percent mammographic density (PMD) is associated with an increased risk of interval breast cancer in screening programs, as are younger age, pre-menopausal status, lower body mass index and hormone therapy. These factors are also associated with variations in PMD. We have examined whether these variables influence the relative frequency of interval and screen-detected breast cancer, independently or through their associations with PMD. We also examined the association of tumor size with PMD and dense and non-dense areas in screen-detected and interval breast cancers. METHODS: We used data from three case-control studies nested in screened populations. Interval breast cancer was defined as invasive breast cancer detected within 12 months of a negative mammogram. We used a computer-assisted method of measuring the dense and total areas of breast tissue in the first (baseline) mammogram taken at entry to screening programs and calculated the non-dense area and PMD. We compared these mammographic features, and other risk factors at baseline, in women with screen-detected (n = 718) and interval breast cancer (n = 125). RESULTS: In multi-variable analysis, the baseline characteristics of younger age, greater dense area and smaller non-dense mammographic area were significantly associated with interval breast cancer compared to screen-detected breast cancer. Compared to screen-detected breast cancers, interval cancers had a larger maximum tumor diameter within each mammographic measure. CONCLUSIONS: Age and the dense and non-dense areas in the baseline mammogram were independently associated with interval breast cancers in screening programs. These results suggest that decreased detection of cancers caused by the area of dense tissue, and more rapid growth associated with a smaller non-dense area, may both contribute to risk of interval breast cancer. Tailoring screening to individual mammographic characteristics at baseline may reduce the number of interval cancers.

Breast-tissue composition and other risk factors for breast cancer in young women: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Mammographic density is a heritable quantitative trait and is a strong risk factor for breast cancer in middle-aged and older women. However, little is known about the development of mammographic density in early life. We used MRI to measure the water content of the breast, which provides a measurement of the fibro-glandular content of breast tissue with similar accuracy to mammography, but without the attendant exposure to radiation. METHODS: Between December, 2003, and December, 2007, we recruited 400 young women, aged 15-30 years, and their mothers. We used MRI scans to measure daughters' breast water and fat, and on the same day obtained blood for hormone assays in the follicular phase of the menstrual cycle for each young woman. Mothers underwent mammography (n=356), and a random sample (n=100) also consented to have a breast MRI scan. FINDINGS: In mothers, per cent water-as measured by MRI-was strongly correlated with per cent mammographic density (r=0.85). Per cent water in daughters (median 44.8%) was significantly higher than in mothers (median 27.8%; p<0.0001), and was independently inversely associated with both their age (p=0.04) and weight (p<0.0001), and positively associated with their height (p<0.0001) and their mothers' per cent mammographic density (p<0.0001). Serum growth hormone concentrations, adjusted for covariates, were positively associated with per cent breast water (p=0.001) in a subgroup of young women (n=280) who had not used oral contraceptives within 6 months. INTERPRETATION: Per cent breast water was greatest during the ages when women are most susceptible to breast carcinogens, and was associated with weight, height, and mother's breast-tissue characteristics, and with serum concentrations of growth hormone: a breast mitogen that also mediates postnatal somatic growth. Mammographic density in middle age might partly be the result of genetic factors that affect growth and development in early life. FUNDING: Canadian Breast Cancer Research Alliance.

Serum lipids, lipoproteins, and risk of breast cancer: a nested case-control study using multiple time points.

BACKGROUND: There is strong evidence that breast cancer risk is influenced by environmental factors. Blood lipid and lipoprotein levels are also influenced by environmental factors and are associated with some breast cancer risk factors. We examined whether serial measures of serum lipids and lipoproteins were associated with breast cancer risk. METHODS: We carried out a nested case-control study within a randomized long-term dietary intervention trial with 4690 women with extensive mammographic density followed for an average of 10 years for breast cancer incidence. We measured lipids in an average of 4.2 blood samples for 279 invasive breast cancer case subjects and 558 matched control subjects. We calculated subaverages of lipids for each subject based on menopausal status and use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) at blood collection and analyzed their association with breast cancer using generalized estimating equations. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: High-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (HDL-C) (P = .05) and apoA1 (P = .02) levels were positively associated with breast cancer risk (75(th) vs 25(th) percentile: HDL-C, 23% higher; apoA1, 28% higher) and non-HDL-C (P = .03) and apoB (P = .01) levels were negatively associated (75(th) vs 25(th) percentile: non-HDL-C, 19% lower; apoB, 22% lower). These associations were observed only when lipids were measured when HRT was not used. Total cholesterol and triglyceride levels were not statistically significantly associated with breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate that serum lipids are associated with breast cancer risk in women with extensive mammographic density. The possibility that interventions for heart disease prevention, which aim to reduce non-HDL-C or raise HDL-C, may have effects on breast cancer risk merits examination.

Evidence that breast tissue stiffness is associated with risk of breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Evidence from animal models shows that tissue stiffness increases the invasion and progression of cancers, including mammary cancer. We here use measurements of the volume and the projected area of the compressed breast during mammography to derive estimates of breast tissue stiffness and examine the relationship of stiffness to risk of breast cancer. METHODS: Mammograms were used to measure the volume and projected areas of total and radiologically dense breast tissue in the unaffected breasts of 362 women with newly diagnosed breast cancer (cases) and 656 women of the same age who did not have breast cancer (controls). Measures of breast tissue volume and the projected area of the compressed breast during mammography were used to calculate the deformation of the breast during compression and, with the recorded compression force, to estimate the stiffness of breast tissue. Stiffness was compared in cases and controls, and associations with breast cancer risk examined after adjustment for other risk factors. RESULTS: After adjustment for percent mammographic density by area measurements, and other risk factors, our estimate of breast tissue stiffness was significantly associated with breast cancer (odds ratio = 1.21, 95% confidence interval = 1.03, 1.43, p = 0.02) and improved breast cancer risk prediction in models with percent mammographic density, by both area and volume measurements. CONCLUSION: An estimate of breast tissue stiffness was associated with breast cancer risk and improved risk prediction based on mammographic measures and other risk factors. Stiffness may provide an additional mechanism by which breast tissue composition is associated with risk of breast cancer and merits examination using more direct methods of measurement.

Breast density measurements with ultrasound tomography: a comparison with film and digital mammography.

PURPOSE: To investigate the use of the whole-breast sound speed measurement as a marker of breast density (BD), a known risk factor for breast cancer. METHODS: As part of an ongoing study of breast cancer detection, 249 patients were scanned with a clinical prototype that operates on the principles of ultrasound tomography. Typically, 40-100 sound speed tomograms were reconstructed from the scan data, corresponding to the entire volume of the breast of each patient. The data were used to estimate the volume averaged sound speed (VASS) of the breast for each patient. The corresponding mammograms were used to calculate mammographic percent density (MPD) using CUMULUS software. Film mammograms were available for 164 patients while 85 digital mammograms were available for the remaining patients. Standard statistical techniques were used to determine associations of breast sound speed with a variety of mammographic measures such as percent density, area of dense tissue, and area of nondense tissue. Furthermore, associations of breast sound speed with continuous variables such as age and weight and dichotomous variables such as parity and menopausal status were also assessed. RESULTS: VASS was found to be significantly associated with MPD. The Spearman correlation coefficient (r(s)) between VASS and MPD was found to be 0.77 and 0.71 for film and digital mammography, respectively. VASS was positively correlated with dense areas by mammography, both digital (r(s) = 0.46) and film (r(s) = 0.56). VASS was negatively associated with nondense area by mammography, both digital (r(s) = -0.58) and film (r(s) = -0.63). BD by all methods was less in postmenopausal than in premenopausal women. The MPD was lower in the postmenopausal group (by 6.6%, p < 0.08, for the digital group and 7.73%, p < 0.007, for the film group). The VASS was also lower in the postmenopausal group (by 15 m∕s, p < 0.001 for the digital group and 8 m∕s, p < 0.08, for the film group). The association of MPD with age was characterized with r(s) = -0.06 (p < 0.6) for digital mammography and r(s) = -0.53 (p < 0.002) for film mammography. For weight, the MPD associations were characterized by r(s) = -0.53 (p < 0.0001) for digital mammography and -0.38 (p < 0.0001) for film mammography. The association of VASS with age was r(s) = -0.33 (p < 0.002) for the digital group and -0.17 (p < 0.03) for the film group. For weight, the relationship was characterized with r(s) = -0.45 (p < 0.001) for the digital group and -0.37 (p < 0.0001) for the film group. CONCLUSIONS: The association between VASS and MPD is strong for both film and digital mammography, suggesting that VASS is a viable measure of breast density. This result sets the stage for future work that will focus on directly testing the association of VASS with breast cancer risk.

Mammographic density, response to hormones, and breast cancer risk.

BACKGROUND: Percent mammographic density (PMD) is a strong risk factor for breast cancer that changes in response to changes in hormone exposure. We have examined the magnitude of the association of hormone exposure with PMD according to subsequent breast cancer risk. METHODS: In three case-control studies, with 1,164 patient cases and 1,155 controls nested in cohorts of women screened with mammography, we examined the association of PMD measured in the baseline mammogram with risk of breast cancer in the following 1 to 8 years (mean, 3 years), according to use of oral contraceptives (OCs) in premenopausal women, menopause, and hormone therapy (HT) in postmenopausal women. All statistical comparisons are adjusted for age and other risk factors. RESULTS: In premenopausal women who later developed breast cancer (patient cases), PMD was 5.3% greater in past users of OCs than in nonusers (P = .06). In controls, OC users had 2% less density than nonusers (P = .44; test for interaction P = .06). The difference in PMD between premenopausal and postmenopausal women for patient cases was 8.5% (P < .001) and for controls, 3.9% (P = .01; test for interaction P = .03). In postmenopausal women, PMD was 6% greater in patients who used HT than in never users (P < .001). Controls who used HT had 1.6% greater PMD (P = .26) than never users (test for interaction P = .001). Differences in PMD resulted mainly from differences in the dense area of the mammogram. CONCLUSION: Differences in PMD associated with differences in hormone exposure were greater in women who later developed breast cancer than in controls in each of the hormone exposures examined.

A randomized trial of dietary intervention for breast cancer prevention.

Epidemiologic data and animal experiments suggest that dietary fat may influence risk of breast cancer. To determine whether intervention with a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet would reduce breast cancer incidence in women at increased risk of the disease, we carried out a randomized controlled trial in Canada. We recruited 4,690 women with extensive mammographic density and randomized them to an intervention group or a comparison group. The intervention group received intensive dietary counseling to reduce fat intake to a target of 15% of calories and increase carbohydrate to 65% of calories. Dietary intakes were assessed throughout using food records. Subjects were followed for at least 7 years and for an average of 10 years. The main outcome was invasive breast cancer. Percentage of calories from fat in the intervention group decreased from 30% at baseline to 20% after randomization and remained 9% to 10% lower than the comparison group throughout. There were 118 invasive breast cancers in the intervention group and 102 in the comparison group [adjusted hazard ratio = 1.19 (95% CI: 0.91-1.55)]. Analysis of food records showed that fat intake at baseline and after randomization was not associated with total breast cancer incidence. Greater weight and lower carbohydrate intake at baseline and after randomization were associated with an increased risk of estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. Our findings suggest that a sustained reduction in dietary fat intake did not reduce risk of breast cancer in women with extensive mammographic density. Weight and carbohydrate intakes were associated with risk of ER-positive breast cancer.

Family history, mammographic density, and risk of breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Mammographic density is a strong and highly heritable risk factor for breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which mammographic density explains the association of family history of breast cancer with risk of the disease. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: We carried out three nested case-control studies in screening programs that included in total 2,322 subjects (1,164 cases and 1,158 controls). We estimated the independent and combined associations of family history and percent mammographic density at baseline with subsequent breast cancer risk. RESULTS: After adjustment for age and other risk factors, compared with women with no affected first-degree relatives, percent mammographic density was 3.1% greater for women with one affected first-degree relative, and 7.0% greater for women with two or more affected relatives (P = 0.001 for linear trend across family history categories). The odds ratios for breast cancer risk were 1.37 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 1.10-1.72] for having one affected relative, and 2.45 (95% CI, 1.30-4.62) for having two or more affected relatives (P for trend = 0.0002). Adjustment for percent mammographic density reduced these odds ratios by 16% and 14%, respectively. Percent mammographic density explained 14% (95% CI, 4-39%) of the association of family history (at least one affected first-degree relative) with breast cancer risk. CONCLUSIONS: Percent mammographic density has features of an intermediate marker for breast cancer, and some of the genes that explain variation in percent mammographic density might be associated with familial risk of breast cancer.

Screen-film mammographic density and breast cancer risk: a comparison of the volumetric standard mammogram form and the interactive threshold measurement methods.

BACKGROUND: Mammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer, usually measured by an area-based threshold method that dichotomizes the breast area on a mammogram into dense and nondense regions. Volumetric methods of breast density measurement, such as the fully automated standard mammogram form (SMF) method that estimates the volume of dense and total breast tissue, may provide a more accurate density measurement and improve risk prediction. METHODS: In 2000-2003, a case-control study was conducted of 367 newly confirmed breast cancer cases and 661 age-matched breast cancer-free controls who underwent screen-film mammography at several centers in Toronto, Canada. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios of breast cancer associated with categories of mammographic density, measured with both the threshold and the SMF (version 2.2beta) methods, adjusting for breast cancer risk factors. RESULTS: Median percent density was higher in cases than in controls for the threshold method (31% versus 27%) but not for the SMF method. Higher correlations were observed between SMF and threshold measurements for breast volume/area (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.95) than for percent density (0.68) or for absolute density (0.36). After adjustment for breast cancer risk factors, odds ratios of breast cancer in the highest compared with the lowest quintile of percent density were 2.19 (95% confidence interval, 1.28-3.72; P(t) <0.01) for the threshold method and 1.27 (95% confidence interval, 0.79-2.04; Pt = 0.32) for the SMF method. CONCLUSION: Threshold percent density is a stronger predictor of breast cancer risk than the SMF version 2.2beta method in digitized images.

Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: evaluation of a novel method of measuring breast tissue volumes.

BACKGROUND: Mammographic density has been found to be strongly associated with risk of breast cancer. We have assessed a novel method of assessing breast tissue that is fully automated, does not require an observer, and measures the volume, rather than the projected area, of the relevant tissues in digitized screen-film mammogram. METHODS: Sixteen mammography machines in seven locations in Toronto were calibrated to allow the estimation of the proportion of radiologically dense (stromal and epithelial tissue) and nondense (fatty) tissue represented in each pixel of the mammographic image. This information was combined with a measurement of breast thickness to calculate the volumes of these tissues. Women with newly diagnosed breast cancer (cases) identified on these mammography machines during the years 2000 to 2003 were compared with other women of the same age who did not have breast cancer (controls). RESULTS: Three hundred sixty-four cases and 656 controls were recruited, epidemiologic data were collected, screen-film mammograms were digitized and measured using both a computer-assisted thresholding method, and the new measure of the volume of density. After adjustment for other risk factors, the odds ratio for those in the 5th quintile compared with the 1st quintile was 1.98 (95% confidence interval, 1.3-3.1) for the volume measure and 1.86 (95% CI, 1.1-3.0) for the area measurement. After inclusion of the volume and area measures in a predictive model, the volume measure lost significance, whereas the area measure remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to our expectations, measurement of the volume of breast tissue did not improve prediction of breast cancer risk.