Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Cancer Causes & Control
Published in: Cancer Causes & Control 9/2007

01-11-2007 | Original Paper

Breast density in relation to risk of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in women undergoing screening mammography

Authors: Todd A. MacKenzie, Linda Titus-Ernstoff, Pamela M. Vacek, Berta Geller, Julia E. Weiss, Martha E. Goodrich, Patricia A. Carney

Published in: Cancer Causes & Control | Issue 9/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Objective

To examine the association between breast density and risk of breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

Methods

We assessed breast density in relation to DCIS risk using combined data from statewide mammography registries in NH and VT. The prospective analyses were based on 572 DCIS cases arising in 154,936 women (58,496 premenopausal and 96,440 postmenopausal). Women in the study were followed on average 4.1 years. Breast density was scored by community radiologists using BIRADS categories (fatty, scattered density, heterogeneous density, extreme density).

Results

In premenopausal women, based on 157 cases, the RR for DCIS risk were 0.29 (95% CI: 0.0.04, 2.24) for fatty breasts, 2.06 (95% CI: 1.39, 3.05) for heterogeneous density, and 2.40 (95% CI: 1.47, 3.91) for extreme density, relative to scattered density. In postmenopausal women, based on 369 cases, the RR for DCIS risk were 0.58 (95% CI: 0.37, 0.93) for fatty breasts, 1.41 (95% CI: 1.12, 1.78) for heterogeneous density, and 1.49 (95% CI: 0.93, 2.37) for extreme density, relative to scattered density. The possible interaction between breast density and menopausal status in relation to DCIS risk was not statistically significant.

Conclusions

We observed an association between breast density and DCIS risk. Although the association seemed stronger in premenopausal women, there was no evidence of an interaction involving breast density and menopausal status.
Literature
1.
Ernster VL, Ballard-Barbash R, Barlow WE et al (2002) Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:1546–1554PubMed
2.
Habel LA, Dignan JJ, Land SR, Salane M, Capra AM, Julian TB (2004) Mammographic density and breast cancer after ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:1467–1472PubMedCrossRef
3.
Boyages J, Delaney G, Taylor R (1999) Predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ: a meta-analysis. Cancer 85:616–628PubMedCrossRef
4.
Warnberg F, Yuen J, Holmberg L (2000) Risk of subsequent invasive breast cancer after breast carcinoma in situ. Lancet 355:724–725PubMedCrossRef
5.
Leonard GD, Swain SM (2004) Ductal carcinoma in situ, complexities and challenges. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:906–920PubMedCrossRef
6.
Baxter NN, Virnig BA, Durham SB, Tuttle TM (2004) Trends in the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:443–448PubMedCrossRef
7.
Sewell CW (2004) Pathology of high-risk breast lesions and ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiol Clin North Am 42:821–30, v
8.
Provenzano E, Hopper JL, Giles GG, Marr G, Venter DJ, Armes JE (2004) Histological markers that predict clinical recurrence in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: an Australian population-based study. Pathology 36:221–229PubMedCrossRef
9.
Renshaw AA, Derhagopian RP, Tizol-Blanco DM, Gould W (2004) Papillomas and atypical papillomas in breast core needle biopsy specimens: risk of carcinoma in subsequent excision. Am J Clin Pathol 122:217–221PubMedCrossRef
10.
11.
Ali-Fehmi R, Carolin K, Wallis T, Visscher DW (2003) Clinicopathologic analysis of breast lesions associated with multiple papillomas. Hum Pathol 34:234–239PubMedCrossRef
12.
Rodrigues NA, Dillon D, Carter D, Parisot N, Haffty BG (2003) Differences in the pathologic and molecular features of intraductal breast carcinoma between younger and older women. Cancer 97:1393–1403PubMedCrossRef
13.
Wohlfahrt J, Rank F, Kroman N, Melbye M (2004) A comparison of reproductive risk factors for CIS lesions and invasive breast cancer. Int J Cancer 108:750–753PubMedCrossRef
14.
Claus EB, Stowe M, Carter D (2003) Oral contraceptives and the risk of ductal breast carcinoma in situ. Breast Cancer Res Treat 81:129–136PubMedCrossRef
15.
Claus EB, Stowe M, Carter D (2001) Breast carcinoma in situ: risk factors and screening patterns. J Natl Cancer Inst 93:1811–1817PubMedCrossRef
16.
Patel AV, Press MF, Meeske K, Calle EE, Bernstein L (2003) Lifetime recreational exercise activity and risk of breast carcinoma in situ. Cancer 98:2161–2169PubMedCrossRef
17.
Kerlikowske K, Barclay J, Grady D, Sickles EA, Ernster V (1997) Comparison of risk factors for ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 89:76–82PubMed
18.
Trentham-Dietz A, Newcomb PA, Storer BE (2000) Risk factors for carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9:697–703PubMed
19.
Lambe M, Hsieh CC, Tsaih SW, Ekbom A, Trichopoulos D, Adami HO (1998) Parity, age at first birth and the risk of carcinoma in situ of the breast. Int J Cancer 77:330–332PubMedCrossRef
20.
Weiss HA, Brinton LA, Brogan D et al (1996) Epidemiology of in situ and invasive breast cancer in women aged under 45. Brit J Cancer 73:1298–1305PubMed
21.
Gapstur SM, Morrow M, Sellers TA (1999) Hormone replacement therapy and risk of breast cancer with a favorable histology. J Am Med Assoc 281:2091–2097CrossRef
22.
Brisson J, Morrison AS, Kopans DB et al (1984) Height and weight, mammographic features of breast tissue, and breast cancer risk. Am J Epidemiol 119:371–381PubMed
23.
Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolf J et al (1995) Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 87:1622–1629PubMedCrossRef
24.
Boyd NF, Lockwood GA, Byng JW, Tritchler DL, Yaffe MJ (1998) Mammographic densities and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 7:1133–1144PubMed
25.
Gill JK, Maskarinec G, Pagano I, Kolonel LN (2006) The association of mammographic density with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the Multiethnic Cohort. Breast Cancer Res 8:R30PubMedCrossRef
26.
Boyd NF, Jensen HM, Cooke G, Lee Han H (1992) Relationship between mammographic and histological risk factors for breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 84:1170–1179PubMedCrossRef
27.
American College of Radiology (ACR) (2003) Breast imaging reporting and data system atlas (BI-RADS® Atlas), © American College of Radiology, Reston, Va
28.
Harvey JA, Bovbjerg VE (2004) Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. Radiology 230:29–41PubMedCrossRef
29.
Warner E, Lockwood G, Tritchler D, Boyd NF (1992) The risk of breast cancer associated with mammographic parenchymal patterns: a meta-analysis of the published literature to examine the effect of method of classification. Cancer Detect Prev 16:67–72PubMed
30.
De Stavola BL, Gravelle IH, Wang DY et al (1990) Relationship of mammographic parenchymal patterns with breast cancer risk factors and risk of breast cancer in a prospective study. Int J Epidemiol 19:247–254PubMedCrossRef
31.
Baines CJ, Dayan R (1999) A tangled web: factors likely to affect the efficacy of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 91:833–838PubMedCrossRef
32.
Vachon CM, Kushi LH, Cerhan JR, Kuni CC, Sellers TA (2000) Association of diet and mammographic breast density in the Minnesota breast cancer family cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9:151–160PubMed
33.
Gram IT, Funkhouser E, Tabar L (1999) Moderate physical activity in relation to mammographic patterns. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 8:117–122PubMed
34.
Chen Z, Wu AH, Gauderman J et al (2004) Does mammographic density reflect ethnic differences in breast cancer incidence rates? Am J Epidemiol 159:140–147PubMedCrossRef
35.
Nagata C, Matsubara T, Fujita H et al (2005) Mammographic density and the risk of breast cancer in Japanese women. Br J Cancer 92:2102–2106PubMedCrossRef
36.
Maskarinec G, Meng L (2000) A case-control study of mammographic densities in Hawaii. Breast Cancer Res Treat 63:153–161PubMedCrossRef
37.
Rutter CM, Mandelson MT, Laya MB, Taplin S (2001) Changes in breast density associated with initiation, discontinuation, and continuing use of hormone replacement therapy. J Am Med Assoc 285:171–176CrossRef
38.
Titus-Ernstoff L, Tosteson A, Kasales C et al (2006) Breast cancer risk factors in relation to breast density. Cancer Causes Control 17:1281–1290PubMedCrossRef
39.
Chow CK, Venzon D, Jones EC, Premkumar A, O’Shaughnessy J, Zujewski J (2000) Effect of tamoxifen on mammographic density. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 9:917–921PubMed
40.
Boyd NF, Dite GS, Stone J et al (2002) Heritability of mammographic density, a risk factor for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347(12):886–894PubMedCrossRef
41.
Ursin G, Hovanessian-Larsen L, Parisky YR, Pike MC, Wu AH (2005) Greatly increased occurrence of breast cancers in areas of mammographically dense tissue. Breast Cancer Res 7:R605–R608PubMedCrossRef
42.
Ma L, Fishell E, Wright B, Hanna W, Allan S, Boyd NF (1992) Case-control study of factors associated with failure to detect breast cancer by mammography. J Nat Cancer Inst 84:781–785PubMedCrossRef
43.
Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL et al (2000) Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen detected cancers. Jour Nat Cancer Inst 92:1081–1087CrossRef
44.
45.
Holland R, Hendriks JH, Mravunac M (1983) Mammographically occult breast cancer. A pathologic and radiologic study. Cancer 52:1810–1819PubMedCrossRef
46.
Boyd NH, Rommens JM, Vogt K et al (2005) Mammographic density as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer. Lancet Oncol 6:798–808PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Breast density in relation to risk of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in women undergoing screening mammography
Authors
Todd A. MacKenzie
Linda Titus-Ernstoff
Pamela M. Vacek
Berta Geller
Julia E. Weiss
Martha E. Goodrich
Patricia A. Carney
Publication date
01-11-2007
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
Cancer Causes & Control / Issue 9/2007
Print ISSN: 0957-5243
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7225
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-007-9035-3

Other articles of this Issue 9/2007

Cancer Causes & Control 9/2007 Go to the issue

Original Paper

Protection of mammography screening against death from breast cancer in women aged 40–64 years

Original Paper

Sun protection and low levels of vitamin D: are people concerned?

Original Paper

Dietary patterns, Mediterranean diet, and endometrial cancer risk

Original Paper

Sun exposure concern, sun protection behaviors and physical activity among Australian adults

Original Paper

Smoking and drinking in relation to oral cancer and oral epithelial dysplasia

Original Paper

Sun exposure, vitamin D receptor gene polymorphisms and risk of non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine
Image Credits