Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2013

01-01-2013 | Review

Is mammographic density differentially associated with breast cancer according to receptor status? A meta-analysis

Authors: Sebastien Antoni, Annie J. Sasco, Isabel dos Santos Silva, Valerie McCormack

Published in: Breast Cancer Research and Treatment | Issue 2/2013

Login to get access

Abstract

Mammographic density (MD) is a strong marker of breast cancer risk, but it is debated whether the association holds, and is of a similar magnitude, for different subtypes of breast cancer defined by receptor status or gene expression profiles. A literature search conducted in June 2012 was used to identify all studies that had investigated the association of MD with subtype-specific breast cancer, independent of age. 7 cohort/case–control and 12 case-only studies were included, comprising a total of >24,000 breast cancer cases. Random effects meta-analysis models were used to combine relative risks (RR) of MD with subtype-specific breast cancer for case–control studies, and in case-only studies to combine relative risk ratios (RRR) of receptor positive versus negative breast tumors. In case–control/cohort studies, relative to women in the lowest density category, women in the highest density category had 3.1-fold (95 % confidence interval [CI] 2.2, 4.2) and 3.2-fold (1.7, 5.9) increased risk of estrogen receptor positive (ER+) and ER− breast cancer, respectively. In case-only analyses, RRRs of breast tumors being ER+ versus ER− were 1.13 (95 % CI 0.89, 1.42) for medium versus minimal MD. MD remained associated with screen-detected ER+ tumors, despite the expectation of this association to be attenuated due to masking bias and overdiagnoses of ER+ tumors. In eight contributing studies, the association of MD did not differ by HER2 status. This combined evidence strengthens the importance of MD as a strong marker of overall and of subtype-specific risk, and confirms its value in overall breast cancer risk assessment and monitoring for both research and clinical purposes.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ et al (2007) Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 356:227–236PubMedCrossRef Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ et al (2007) Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 356:227–236PubMedCrossRef
2.
go back to reference McCormack VA, dos Santos SilvaI (2006) Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15:1159–1169PubMedCrossRef McCormack VA, dos Santos SilvaI (2006) Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15:1159–1169PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Cuzick J, Warwick J, Pinney E et al (2011) Tamoxifen-induced reduction in mammographic density and breast cancer risk reduction: a nested case–control study. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:744–752PubMedCrossRef Cuzick J, Warwick J, Pinney E et al (2011) Tamoxifen-induced reduction in mammographic density and breast cancer risk reduction: a nested case–control study. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:744–752PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Greendale GA, Reboussin BA, Sie A et al (1999) Effects of estrogen and estrogen-progestin on mammographic parenchymal density. Postmenopausal Estrogen/Progestin Interventions (PEPI) Investigators. Ann Intern Med 130:262–269PubMed Greendale GA, Reboussin BA, Sie A et al (1999) Effects of estrogen and estrogen-progestin on mammographic parenchymal density. Postmenopausal Estrogen/Progestin Interventions (PEPI) Investigators. Ann Intern Med 130:262–269PubMed
5.
go back to reference Phipps AI, Chlebowski RT, Prentice R et al (2011) Reproductive history and oral contraceptive use in relation to risk of triple-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:470–477PubMedCrossRef Phipps AI, Chlebowski RT, Prentice R et al (2011) Reproductive history and oral contraceptive use in relation to risk of triple-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:470–477PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Tworoger SS, Eliassen AH, Sluss P et al (2007) A prospective study of plasma prolactin concentrations and risk of premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:1482–1488PubMedCrossRef Tworoger SS, Eliassen AH, Sluss P et al (2007) A prospective study of plasma prolactin concentrations and risk of premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:1482–1488PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Boyd NF, Stone J, Martin LJ et al (2002) The association of breast mitogens with mammographic densities. Br J Cancer 87:876–882PubMedCrossRef Boyd NF, Stone J, Martin LJ et al (2002) The association of breast mitogens with mammographic densities. Br J Cancer 87:876–882PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Greendale GA, Huang MH, Ursin G et al (2007) Serum prolactin levels are positively associated with mammographic density in postmenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res Treat 105:337–346PubMedCrossRef Greendale GA, Huang MH, Ursin G et al (2007) Serum prolactin levels are positively associated with mammographic density in postmenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res Treat 105:337–346PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference McCormack VA, Dowsett M, Folkerd E et al (2009) Sex steroids, growth factors and mammographic density: a cross-sectional study of UK postmenopausal Caucasian and Afro-Caribbean women. Breast Cancer Res 11:R38PubMedCrossRef McCormack VA, Dowsett M, Folkerd E et al (2009) Sex steroids, growth factors and mammographic density: a cross-sectional study of UK postmenopausal Caucasian and Afro-Caribbean women. Breast Cancer Res 11:R38PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Ghosh S, Kang T, Wang H et al (2011) Mechanical phenotype is important for stromal aromatase expression. Steroids 76:797–801PubMedCrossRef Ghosh S, Kang T, Wang H et al (2011) Mechanical phenotype is important for stromal aromatase expression. Steroids 76:797–801PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Boyd NF, Rommens JM, Vogt K et al (2005) Mammographic breast density as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer. Lancet Oncol 6:798–808PubMedCrossRef Boyd NF, Rommens JM, Vogt K et al (2005) Mammographic breast density as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer. Lancet Oncol 6:798–808PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Ritte RE, Lukanova A, Dossus L et al (2011) Postmenopausal serum sex steroids and risk of hormone receptor positive and negative breast cancer: a nested case–control study. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 4:1626–1635CrossRef Ritte RE, Lukanova A, Dossus L et al (2011) Postmenopausal serum sex steroids and risk of hormone receptor positive and negative breast cancer: a nested case–control study. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 4:1626–1635CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Evans DG, Warwick J, Astley SM et al (2012) Assessing individual breast cancer risk within the U.K. National Health Service Breast Screening Program: a new paradigm for cancer prevention. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 5:943–951CrossRef Evans DG, Warwick J, Astley SM et al (2012) Assessing individual breast cancer risk within the U.K. National Health Service Breast Screening Program: a new paradigm for cancer prevention. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 5:943–951CrossRef
14.
go back to reference Conroy SM, Pagano I, Kolonel LN et al (2011) Mammographic density and hormone receptor expression in breast cancer: the Multiethnic Cohort Study. Cancer Epidemiol 35:448–452PubMedCrossRef Conroy SM, Pagano I, Kolonel LN et al (2011) Mammographic density and hormone receptor expression in breast cancer: the Multiethnic Cohort Study. Cancer Epidemiol 35:448–452PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Ziv E, Tice J, Smith-Bindman R et al (2004) Mammographic density and estrogen receptor status of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 13:2090–2095PubMed Ziv E, Tice J, Smith-Bindman R et al (2004) Mammographic density and estrogen receptor status of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 13:2090–2095PubMed
16.
go back to reference Phipps AI, Buist DS, Malone KE et al (2012) Breast density, body mass index, and risk of tumor marker-defined subtypes of breast cancer. Ann Epidemiol 22:340–348PubMedCrossRef Phipps AI, Buist DS, Malone KE et al (2012) Breast density, body mass index, and risk of tumor marker-defined subtypes of breast cancer. Ann Epidemiol 22:340–348PubMedCrossRef
17.
go back to reference Eriksson L, Hall P, Czene K et al (2012) Mammographic density and molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 107:18–23PubMedCrossRef Eriksson L, Hall P, Czene K et al (2012) Mammographic density and molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 107:18–23PubMedCrossRef
18.
go back to reference Yaghjyan L, Colditz GA, Collins LC et al (2011) Mammographic breast density and subsequent risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women according to tumor characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:1179–1189PubMedCrossRef Yaghjyan L, Colditz GA, Collins LC et al (2011) Mammographic breast density and subsequent risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women according to tumor characteristics. J Natl Cancer Inst 103:1179–1189PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Ding J, Warren R, Girling A et al (2010) Mammographic density, estrogen receptor status and other breast cancer tumor characteristics. Breast J 16:279–289PubMedCrossRef Ding J, Warren R, Girling A et al (2010) Mammographic density, estrogen receptor status and other breast cancer tumor characteristics. Breast J 16:279–289PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Olsen AH, Bihrmann K, Jensen MB et al (2009) Breast density and outcome of mammography screening: a cohort study. Br J Cancer 100:1205–1208PubMedCrossRef Olsen AH, Bihrmann K, Jensen MB et al (2009) Breast density and outcome of mammography screening: a cohort study. Br J Cancer 100:1205–1208PubMedCrossRef
21.
go back to reference Arora N, King TA, Jacks LM et al (2010) Impact of breast density on the presenting features of malignancy. Ann Surg Oncol 17(Suppl 3):211–218PubMedCrossRef Arora N, King TA, Jacks LM et al (2010) Impact of breast density on the presenting features of malignancy. Ann Surg Oncol 17(Suppl 3):211–218PubMedCrossRef
22.
go back to reference Hinton CP, Williams MR, Roebuck EJ et al (1984) The relationship of background mammographic pattern to hormone dependency in breast cancer. Br J Surg 71:357–359PubMedCrossRef Hinton CP, Williams MR, Roebuck EJ et al (1984) The relationship of background mammographic pattern to hormone dependency in breast cancer. Br J Surg 71:357–359PubMedCrossRef
23.
go back to reference Ma H, Luo J, Press MF et al (2009) Is there a difference in the association between percent mammographic density and subtypes of breast cancer? Luminal A and triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 18:479–485PubMedCrossRef Ma H, Luo J, Press MF et al (2009) Is there a difference in the association between percent mammographic density and subtypes of breast cancer? Luminal A and triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 18:479–485PubMedCrossRef
24.
go back to reference Moller Nielsen NS, Poulsen HS (1985) Relation between mammographic findings and hormonal receptor content in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 145:501–504 Moller Nielsen NS, Poulsen HS (1985) Relation between mammographic findings and hormonal receptor content in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 145:501–504
25.
go back to reference Chen JH, Hsu FT, Shih HN et al (2009) Does breast density show difference in patients with estrogen receptor-positive and estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer measured on MRI? Ann Oncol 20:1447–1449PubMedCrossRef Chen JH, Hsu FT, Shih HN et al (2009) Does breast density show difference in patients with estrogen receptor-positive and estrogen receptor-negative breast cancer measured on MRI? Ann Oncol 20:1447–1449PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Aiello EJ, Buist DS, White E et al (2005) Association between mammographic breast density and breast cancer tumor characteristics. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14:662–668PubMedCrossRef Aiello EJ, Buist DS, White E et al (2005) Association between mammographic breast density and breast cancer tumor characteristics. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14:662–668PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Fasching PA, Heusinger K, Loehberg CR et al (2006) Influence of mammographic density on the diagnostic accuracy of tumor size assessment and association with breast cancer tumor characteristics. Eur J Radiol 60:398–404PubMedCrossRef Fasching PA, Heusinger K, Loehberg CR et al (2006) Influence of mammographic density on the diagnostic accuracy of tumor size assessment and association with breast cancer tumor characteristics. Eur J Radiol 60:398–404PubMedCrossRef
28.
go back to reference Yang WT, Dryden M, Broglio K et al (2008) Mammographic features of triple receptor-negative primary breast cancers in young premenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res Treat 111:405–410PubMedCrossRef Yang WT, Dryden M, Broglio K et al (2008) Mammographic features of triple receptor-negative primary breast cancers in young premenopausal women. Breast Cancer Res Treat 111:405–410PubMedCrossRef
29.
go back to reference Gierach GL, Ichikawa L, Kerlikowske K et al (2012) Relationship between mammographic density and breast cancer death in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. J Natl Cancer Inst 104:1218–1227PubMedCrossRef Gierach GL, Ichikawa L, Kerlikowske K et al (2012) Relationship between mammographic density and breast cancer death in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. J Natl Cancer Inst 104:1218–1227PubMedCrossRef
30.
go back to reference Collett K, Stefansson IM, Eide J et al (2005) A basal epithelial phenotype is more frequent in interval breast cancers compared with screen detected tumors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14:1108–1112PubMedCrossRef Collett K, Stefansson IM, Eide J et al (2005) A basal epithelial phenotype is more frequent in interval breast cancers compared with screen detected tumors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 14:1108–1112PubMedCrossRef
31.
go back to reference Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL et al (2000) Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:1081–1087PubMedCrossRef Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL et al (2000) Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:1081–1087PubMedCrossRef
32.
go back to reference Pike MC, Krailo MD, Henderson BE et al (1983) ‘Hormonal’ risk factors, ‘breast tissue age’ and the age-incidence of breast cancer. Nature 303:767–770PubMedCrossRef Pike MC, Krailo MD, Henderson BE et al (1983) ‘Hormonal’ risk factors, ‘breast tissue age’ and the age-incidence of breast cancer. Nature 303:767–770PubMedCrossRef
33.
go back to reference Defilippis RA, Chang H, Dumont N et al (2012) CD36 repression activates a multicellular stromal program shared by high mammographic density and tumor tissues. Cancer Discov 2:826–839PubMedCrossRef Defilippis RA, Chang H, Dumont N et al (2012) CD36 repression activates a multicellular stromal program shared by high mammographic density and tumor tissues. Cancer Discov 2:826–839PubMedCrossRef
34.
go back to reference Ciatto S, Cecchini S, Iossa A et al (1989) Association of estrogen receptors with parenchymal pattern at mammography. Radiology 170:695–697PubMed Ciatto S, Cecchini S, Iossa A et al (1989) Association of estrogen receptors with parenchymal pattern at mammography. Radiology 170:695–697PubMed
35.
go back to reference Nielsen NS, Andersen J, Poulsen HS et al (1992) Prediction of hormone responsiveness by mammographic parenchymal pattern in advanced primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 23:219–222PubMedCrossRef Nielsen NS, Andersen J, Poulsen HS et al (1992) Prediction of hormone responsiveness by mammographic parenchymal pattern in advanced primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 23:219–222PubMedCrossRef
36.
go back to reference Roubidoux MA, Bailey JE, Wray LA et al (2004) Invasive cancers detected after breast cancer screening yielded a negative result: relationship of mammographic density to tumor prognostic factors. Radiology 230:42–48PubMedCrossRef Roubidoux MA, Bailey JE, Wray LA et al (2004) Invasive cancers detected after breast cancer screening yielded a negative result: relationship of mammographic density to tumor prognostic factors. Radiology 230:42–48PubMedCrossRef
37.
go back to reference Boyd NF, Fishell E, Tonkin K et al (1987) Age as a confounding factor in the association of mammographic dysplasia and estrogen receptor concentration in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 10:51–54PubMedCrossRef Boyd NF, Fishell E, Tonkin K et al (1987) Age as a confounding factor in the association of mammographic dysplasia and estrogen receptor concentration in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 10:51–54PubMedCrossRef
38.
go back to reference Ghosh K, Brandt KR, Sellers TA et al (2008) Association of mammographic density with the pathology of subsequent breast cancer among postmenopausal women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 17:872–879PubMedCrossRef Ghosh K, Brandt KR, Sellers TA et al (2008) Association of mammographic density with the pathology of subsequent breast cancer among postmenopausal women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 17:872–879PubMedCrossRef
39.
go back to reference Heusinger K, Jud SM, Haberle L et al (2012) Association of mammographic density with hormone receptors in invasive breast cancers—results from a case-only study. Int J Cancer. doi:10.1002/ijc.27515 PubMed Heusinger K, Jud SM, Haberle L et al (2012) Association of mammographic density with hormone receptors in invasive breast cancers—results from a case-only study. Int J Cancer. doi:10.​1002/​ijc.​27515 PubMed
Metadata
Title
Is mammographic density differentially associated with breast cancer according to receptor status? A meta-analysis
Authors
Sebastien Antoni
Annie J. Sasco
Isabel dos Santos Silva
Valerie McCormack
Publication date
01-01-2013
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment / Issue 2/2013
Print ISSN: 0167-6806
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7217
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-012-2362-4

Other articles of this Issue 2/2013

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 2/2013 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

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