© 1997 by Oxford University Press
Journal Of The National Cancer Institute, Vol 89, 76-82, Copyright © 1997 by Oxford University Press
K Kerlikowske, J Barclay, D Grady, EA Sickles and V Ernster
BACKGROUND: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) accounts for approximately 12%
of newly diagnosed breast cancers. Knowledge of the factors that predict
who will be diagnosed with DCIS is very limited. PURPOSE: The goal of this
study was to determine risk factors associated with DCIS and whether these
risk factors are similar to those associated with invasive breast cancer.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study of 39,542 women aged 30 years
and older who underwent a screening mammographic examination at the
University of California San Francisco Mobile Mammography Screening Program
from April 1985 through September 1995. A breast cancer risk profile and
clinical history were obtained for each woman. Follow-up after abnormal
mammography was performed to determine the presence of DCIS or invasive
breast cancer by contacting the women's physicians and by linkage to the
regional Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry.
Multivariate analysis was performed by the use of polytomous logistic
regression. Two-sided statistical tests were used to determine P values.
RESULTS: Among women aged 30-49 years, a family history of breast cancer
(i.e., at least one affected first degree relative) was associated with an
increased risk of DCIS (Odds ratio [OR] = 2.4; 95% confidence interval [CI]
= 1.1-4.9) and body mass index greater than or equal to 25 kg/m2 was
associated with a decreased risk of DCIS (OR = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.2 to 0.9).
For each of these factors, there was a trend in the same direction
bordering on statistical significance for invasive cancer (ORs = 1.7 [95%
CI = 0.9- 3.4] and 0.6 [95% CI = 0.3-1.1], respectively). Report of a
palpable mass was associated with an increased risk of invasive cancer
among women aged 30-49 years (OR = 12.0; 95% CI = 7.1-20.0); there was a
trend in the same direction for DCIS (OR = 2.0; 95% CI = 0.8-5.1), but the
association was much stronger for invasive disease than for DCIS (OR = 6.0;
95% CI = 2.1-18.0; P = .001). Among women aged 50 years and older, family
history of breast cancer and nulliparity or age at birth of first child of
30 years or older increased the risk of both DCIS (ORs = 2.2 [95% CI =
1.0-4.2] and 2.3 [95% CI = 1.3-3.8], respectively) and invasive breast
cancer (ORs = 1.5 [95% CI = 1.0-2.2] and 1.6 [95% CI = 1.2-2.1],
respectively). Report of a palpable mass was not associated with an
increased risk of DCIS among women 50 years and older, but it was strongly
associated with an increased risk of invasive cancer (OR = 9.3; 95% CI =
6.0-14.0). Increasing age was associated with an increased risk of both
DCIS and invasive cancer among women aged 30-49 years, but the association
was stronger for invasive disease; a trend in the same direction bordering
on statistical significance was observed for women aged 50 years and older.
CONCLUSION: Risk factors for DCIS are similar to those for invasive breast
cancer. IMPLICATIONS: More research is needed to better understand the
malignant potential of DCIS lesions and factors that predict which lesions
will become invasive breast cancer if left untreated.
ARTICLES
Comparison of risk factors for ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University of California, San Francisco, USA.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  B. J. Wilson, N. Qureshi, P. Santaguida, J. Little, J. C. Carroll, J. Allanson, and P. Raina Systematic Review: Family History in Risk Assessment for Common Diseases Ann Intern Med, November 2, 2009; (2009) 0000605-200912150-00177v1. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. R. Eheman, K. M. Shaw, A. B. Ryerson, J. W. Miller, U. A. Ajani, and M. C. White The Changing Incidence of In situ and Invasive Ductal and Lobular Breast Carcinomas: United States, 1999-2004 Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., June 1, 2009; 18(6): 1763 - 1769. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. S. Phillips, R. C. Millikan, J. C. Schroeder, J. S. Barnholtz-Sloan, and B. J. Levine Reproductive and Hormonal Risk Factors for Ductal Carcinoma In situ of the Breast Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2009; 18(5): 1507 - 1514. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 B. J. Czerniecki, R. E. Roses, and G. K. Koski Development of Vaccines for High-Risk Ductal Carcinoma In situ of the Breast Cancer Res., July 15, 2007; 67(14): 6531 - 6534. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. S. Hwang, J. L. McLennan, D. H. Moore, B. B. Crawford, L. J. Esserman, and J. L. Ziegler Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in BRCA Mutation Carriers J. Clin. Oncol., February 20, 2007; 25(6): 642 - 647. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 W. E. Barlow, E. White, R. Ballard-Barbash, P. M. Vacek, L. Titus-Ernstoff, P. A. Carney, J. A. Tice, D. S. M. Buist, B. M. Geller, R. Rosenberg, et al. Prospective breast cancer risk prediction model for women undergoing screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst, September 6, 2006; 98(17): 1204 - 1214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. D. Leonard and S. M. Swain Ductal Carcinoma In Situ, Complexities and Challenges J Natl Cancer Inst, June 16, 2004; 96(12): 906 - 920. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. J. Burstein, K. Polyak, J. S. Wong, S. C. Lester, and C. M. Kaelin Ductal Carcinoma in Situ of the Breast N. Engl. J. Med., April 1, 2004; 350(14): 1430 - 1441. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. L. Ernster, R. Ballard-Barbash, W. E. Barlow, Y. Zheng, D. L. Weaver, G. Cutter, B. C. Yankaskas, R. Rosenberg, P. A. Carney, K. Kerlikowske, et al. Detection of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Women Undergoing Screening Mammography J Natl Cancer Inst, October 16, 2002; 94(20): 1546 - 1554. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. L. Davis and P. S. Webster The Social Context of Science: Cancer and the Environment The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, January 1, 2002; 584(1): 13 - 34. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. B. Claus, M. Stowe, and D. Carter Breast Carcinoma In Situ: Risk Factors and Screening Patterns J Natl Cancer Inst, December 5, 2001; 93(23): 1811 - 1817. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
K. Kerlikowske, P. A. Carney, B. Geller, M. T. Mandelson, S. H. Taplin, K. Malvin, V. Ernster, N. Urban, G. Cutter, R. Rosenberg, et al. Performance of Screening Mammography among Women with and without a First-Degree Relative with Breast Cancer Ann Intern Med, December 5, 2000; 133(11): 855 - 863. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. M. Waldman, S. DeVries, K. L. Chew, D. H. Moore II, K. Kerlikowske, and B.-M. Ljung Chromosomal Alterations in Ductal Carcinomas In Situ and Their In Situ Recurrences J Natl Cancer Inst, February 16, 2000; 92(4): 313 - 320. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Ziogas, M. Gildea, P. Cohen, D. Bringman, T. H. Taylor, D. Seminara, D. Barker, G. Casey, R. Haile, S.-Y. Liao, et al. Cancer Risk Estimates for Family Members of a Population-based Family Registry for Breast and Ovarian Cancer Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., January 1, 2000; 9(1): 103 - 111. [Abstract] [Full Text]
|
|