© 1999 by Oxford University Press
Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 91, No. 16, 1404-1408,
August 18, 1999
© 1999 Oxford University Press
REPORTS |
Mammographic Densities and Risk of Breast Cancer Among Subjects With a Family History of This Disease
Affiliations of authors: N. F. Boyd, Division of Epidemiology and Statistics, Ontario Cancer Institute, and Division of Preventive Oncology, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Canada; G. A. Lockwood, L. J. Martin, D. L. Tritchler, Division of Epidemiology and Statistics, Ontario Cancer Institute; J. A. Knight, Division of Preventive Oncology, Cancer Care Ontario; R. A. Jong, Department of Radiology, Mount Sinai Hospital, Toronto; E. Fishell, Women's College Hospital, Toronto; J. W. Byng, M. J. Yaffe, Imaging Research, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center, Toronto.
Correspondence to: Norman F. Boyd, M.D., F.R.C.P.C., Division of Epidemiology and Statistics, Ontario Cancer Institute, 610 University Ave., Toronto, ON, Canada M5G 2M9.
BACKGROUND: A family history of breast cancer is known to increase risk of the disease, but other genetic and environmental factors that modify this risk are likely to exist. One of these factors is mammographic density, and we have sought evidence that it is associated with increased risk of breast cancer among women with a family history of breast cancer. METHODS: We used data from a nested case-control study based on the Canadian National Breast Screening Study (NBSS). From 354 case patients with incident breast cancer detected at least 12 months after entry into the NBSS and 354 matched control subjects, we analyzed subjects who were identified as having a family history of breast cancer according to one of three, nonmutually exclusive, criteria. We compared the mammographic densities of case patients and control subjects by radiologic and computer-assisted methods of measurement. RESULTS: After adjustment for other risk factors for breast cancer, the relative risks (RRs) between the most and least extensive categories of breast density were as follows: For at least one first-degree relative with breast cancer, RR = 11.14 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.54-80.39); for at least two affected first- or second-degree relatives, RR = 2.57 (95% CI = 0.23-28.22); for at least one first- or second-degree relative with breast cancer, RR = 5.43 (95% CI = 1.85-15.88). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that mammographic density may be strongly associated with risk of breast cancer among women with a family history of the disease. Because mammographic densities can be modified by dietary and hormonal interventions, the results suggest potential approaches to the prevention of breast cancer in women with a family history of breast cancer.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. B. Terry, D. S.M. Buist, A. Trentham-Dietz, T. M. James-Todd, and Y. Liao Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs and Change in Mammographic Density: A Cohort Study Using Pharmacy Records on Over 29,000 Postmenopausal Women Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2008; 17(5): 1088 - 1095. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Ghosh, K. R. Brandt, T. A. Sellers, C. Reynolds, C. G. Scott, S. D. Maloney, M. J. Carston, V. S. Pankratz, and C. M. Vachon Association of Mammographic Density with the Pathology of Subsequent Breast Cancer among Postmenopausal Women Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2008; 17(4): 872 - 879. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. Zhi, B. Ou, B.-M. Luo, X. Feng, Y.-L. Wen, and H.-Y. Yang Comparison of Ultrasound Elastography, Mammography, and Sonography in the Diagnosis of Solid Breast Lesions J. Ultrasound Med., June 1, 2007; 26(6): 807 - 815. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. M. Vachon, V. S. Pankratz, C. G. Scott, S. D. Maloney, K. Ghosh, K. R. Brandt, T. Milanese, M. J. Carston, and T. A. Sellers Longitudinal Trends in Mammographic Percent Density and Breast Cancer Risk Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2007; 16(5): 921 - 928. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. E. Olson, C. X. Ma, L. L. Pelleymounter, D. J. Schaid, V. S. Pankratz, R. A. Vierkant, Z. S. Fredericksen, J. N. Ingle, Y. Wu, F. Couch, et al. A Comprehensive Examination of CYP19 Variation and Breast Density Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., March 1, 2007; 16(3): 623 - 625. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. M. Vachon, K. R. Brandt, K. Ghosh, C. G. Scott, S. D. Maloney, M. J. Carston, V. S. Pankratz, and T. A. Sellers Mammographic Breast Density as a General Marker of Breast Cancer Risk Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., January 1, 2007; 16(1): 43 - 49. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. J. Fabian and B. F. Kimler Mammographic Density: Use in Risk Assessment and as a Biomarker in Prevention Trials J. Nutr., October 1, 2006; 136(10): 2705S - 2708S. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. E. Martin, M. A. Helvie, C. Zhou, M. A. Roubidoux, J. E. Bailey, C. Paramagul, C. E. Blane, K. A. Klein, S. S. Sonnad, and H.-P. Chan Mammographic Density Measured with Quantitative Computer-aided Method: Comparison with Radiologists' Estimates and BI-RADS Categories Radiology, September 1, 2006; 240(3): 656 - 665. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. R. Palomares, J. R.B. Machia, C. D. Lehman, J. R. Daling, and A. McTiernan Mammographic density correlation with gail model breast cancer risk estimates and component risk factors. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2006; 15(7): 1324 - 1330. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. A. McCormack and I. dos Santos Silva Breast Density and Parenchymal Patterns as Markers of Breast Cancer Risk: A Meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., June 1, 2006; 15(6): 1159 - 1169. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Mitchell, A. C. Antoniou, R. Warren, S. Peock, J. Brown, R. Davies, J. Mattison, M. Cook, I. Warsi, D. G. Evans, et al. Mammographic Density and Breast Cancer Risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers Cancer Res., February 1, 2006; 66(3): 1866 - 1872. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. L. Frankenfeld, A. McTiernan, E. J. Aiello, W. K. Thomas, K. LaCroix, J. Schramm, S. M. Schwartz, V. L. Holt, and J. W. Lampe Mammographic Density in Relation to Daidzein-Metabolizing Phenotypes in Overweight, Postmenopausal Women Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2004; 13(7): 1156 - 1162. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. H. Lai, D. Vesprini, W. Zhang, M. J. Yaffe, M. Pollak, and S. A. Narod A Polymorphic Locus in the Promoter Region of the IGFBP3 Gene Is Related to Mammographic Breast Density Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2004; 13(4): 573 - 582. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Harvey and V. E. Bovbjerg Quantitative Assessment of Mammographic Breast Density: Relationship with Breast Cancer Risk Radiology, January 1, 2004; 230(1): 29 - 41. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. Crystal, S. D. Strano, S. Shcharynski, and M. J. Koretz Using Sonography to Screen Women with Mammographically Dense Breasts Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2003; 181(1): 177 - 182. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. J. Fabian, B. F. Kimler, D. A. Brady, M. S. Mayo, C. H. J. Chang, J. A. Ferraro, C. M. Zalles, A. L. Stanton, S. Masood, W. E. Grizzle, et al. A Phase II Breast Cancer Chemoprevention Trial of Oral {alpha}-Difluoromethylornithine: Breast Tissue, Imaging, and Serum and Urine Biomarkers Clin. Cancer Res., October 1, 2002; 8(10): 3105 - 3117. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. Maskarinec, L. Meng, and G. Ursin Ethnic differences in mammographic densities Int. J. Epidemiol., October 1, 2001; 30(5): 959 - 965. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Clemons and P. Goss Estrogen and the Risk of Breast Cancer N. Engl. J. Med., January 25, 2001; 344(4): 276 - 285. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. K. Chow, D. Venzon, E. C. Jones, A. Premkumar, J. O’Shaughnessy, and J. Zujewski Effect of Tamoxifen on Mammographic Density Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., September 1, 2000; 9(9): 917 - 921. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. T. Chlebowski Reducing the Risk of Breast Cancer N. Engl. J. Med., July 20, 2000; 343(3): 191 - 198. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|