Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk.

Background: Mammographic density defined by the conventional pixel brightness threshold, and adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI), is a well-established risk factor for breast cancer. We asked if higher thresholds better separate women with and without breast cancer. Methods: We studied Australian women, 354 with breast cancer over-sampled for early-onset and family history, and 944 unaffected controls frequency-matched for age at mammogram. We measured mammographic dense area and percent density using the CUMULUS software at the conventional threshold, which we call Cumulus , and at two increasingly higher thresholds, which we call Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus , respectively. All measures were Box-Cox transformed and adjusted for age and BMI. We estimated the odds per adjusted standard deviation (OPERA) using logistic regression and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus were correlated with Cumulus (r ∼ 0.8 and 0.6 , respectively) . For dense area, the OPERA was 1.62, 1.74 and 1.73 for Cumulus, Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus , respectively (all P < 0.001). After adjusting for Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus , Cumulus was not significant ( P > 0.6). The OPERAs for percent density were less but gave similar findings. The mean of the standardized adjusted Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus dense area measures was the best predictor; OPERA = 1.87 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.64-2.14] and AUC = 0.68 (0.65-0.71). Conclusions: The areas of higher mammographically dense regions are associated with almost 30% stronger breast cancer risk gradient, explain the risk association of the conventional measure and might be more aetiologically important. This has substantial implications for clinical translation and molecular, genetic and epidemiological research.

Childhood body mass index and adult mammographic density measures that predict breast cancer risk.

The aim of the present study is to determine if body mass index (BMI) during childhood is associated with the breast cancer risk factor 'adult mammographic density adjusted for age and BMI'. In 1968, the Tasmanian Longitudinal Health Study studied every Tasmanian school child born in 1961. We obtained measured heights and weights from annual school medical records across ages 7-15 years and imputed missing values. Between 2009 and 2012, we administered to 490 women a questionnaire that asked current height and weight and digitised at least one mammogram per woman. Absolute and percent mammographic densities were measured using the computer-assisted method CUMULUS. We used linear regression and adjusted for age at interview and log current BMI. The mammographic density measures were negatively associated: with log BMI at each age from 7 to 15 years (all p < 0.05); with the average of standardised log BMIs across ages 7-15 years (p < 0.0005); and more strongly with standardised log BMI measures closer to age 15 years (p < 0.03). Childhood BMI measures explained 7 and 10 % of the variance in absolute and percent mammographic densities, respectively, and 25 and 20 % of the association between current BMI and absolute and percent mammographic densities, respectively. Associations were not altered by adjustment for age at menarche. There is a negative association between BMI in late childhood and the adult mammographic density measures that predict breast cancer risk. This could explain, at least in part, why BMI in adolescence is negatively associated with breast cancer risk.