Literature DB >> 17229950

Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer.

Norman F Boyd1, Helen Guo, Lisa J Martin, Limei Sun, Jennifer Stone, Eve Fishell, Roberta A Jong, Greg Hislop, Anna Chiarelli, Salomon Minkin, Martin J Yaffe.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Extensive mammographic density is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer and makes the detection of cancer by mammography difficult, but the influence of density on risk according to method of cancer detection is unknown.
METHODS: We carried out three nested case-control studies in screened populations with 1112 matched case-control pairs. We examined the association of the measured percentage of density in the baseline mammogram with risk of breast cancer, according to method of cancer detection, time since the initiation of screening, and age.
RESULTS: As compared with women with density in less than 10% of the mammogram, women with density in 75% or more had an increased risk of breast cancer (odds ratio, 4.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0 to 7.4), whether detected by screening (odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 2.0 to 6.2) or less than 12 months after a negative screening examination (odds ratio, 17.8; 95% CI, 4.8 to 65.9). Increased risk of breast cancer, whether detected by screening or other means, persisted for at least 8 years after study entry and was greater in younger than in older women. For women younger than the median age of 56 years, 26% of all breast cancers and 50% of cancers detected less than 12 months after a negative screening test were attributable to density in 50% or more of the mammogram.
CONCLUSIONS: Extensive mammographic density is strongly associated with the risk of breast cancer detected by screening or between screening tests. A substantial fraction of breast cancers can be attributed to this risk factor. Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17229950     DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa062790

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  N Engl J Med        ISSN: 0028-4793            Impact factor:   91.245


  699 in total

1.  Molecular imaging using light-absorbing imaging agents and a clinical optical breast imaging system--a phantom study.

Authors:  Stephanie M W Y van de Ven; Niculae Mincu; Jean Brunette; Guobin Ma; Mario Khayat; Debra M Ikeda; Sanjiv S Gambhir
Journal:  Mol Imaging Biol       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 3.488

Review 2.  Clinical and epidemiological issues in mammographic density.

Authors:  Valentina Assi; Jane Warwick; Jack Cuzick; Stephen W Duffy
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  Residual confounding after adjustment for age: a minor issue in breast cancer screening effectiveness.

Authors:  Guido van Schoor; Ellen Paap; Mireille J M Broeders; André L M Verbeek
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 8.082

4.  Computer-aided assessment of breast density: comparison of supervised deep learning and feature-based statistical learning.

Authors:  Songfeng Li; Jun Wei; Heang-Ping Chan; Mark A Helvie; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Yao Lu; Chuan Zhou; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Ravi K Samala
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Development of a quantitative method for analysis of breast density based on three-dimensional breast MRI.

Authors:  Ke Nie; Jeon-Hor Chen; Siwa Chan; Man-Kwun I Chau; Hon J Yu; Shadfar Bahri; Tiffany Tseng; Orhan Nalcioglu; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 6.  Review of quantitative multiscale imaging of breast cancer.

Authors:  Michael A Pinkert; Lonie R Salkowski; Patricia J Keely; Timothy J Hall; Walter F Block; Kevin W Eliceiri
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2018-01-22

7.  Mammographic Density and Prediction of Nodal Status in Breast Cancer Patients.

Authors:  C C Hack; L Häberle; K Geisler; R Schulz-Wendtland; A Hartmann; P A Fasching; M Uder; D L Wachter; S M Jud; C R Loehberg; M P Lux; C Rauh; M W Beckmann; K Heusinger
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 2.915

8.  Breast Cancer Risk - From Genetics to Molecular Understanding of Pathogenesis.

Authors:  P A Fasching; A B Ekici; D L Wachter; A Hein; C M Bayer; L Häberle; C R Loehberg; M Schneider; S M Jud; K Heusinger; M Rübner; C Rauh; M R Bani; M P Lux; R Schulz-Wendtland; A Hartmann; M W Beckmann
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.915

9.  Earlier detection of breast cancer with ultrasound molecular imaging in a transgenic mouse model.

Authors:  Sunitha V Bachawal; Kristin C Jensen; Amelie M Lutz; Sanjiv S Gambhir; Francois Tranquart; Lu Tian; Jürgen K Willmann
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2013-01-17       Impact factor: 12.701

10.  Comparing CISNET Breast Cancer Incidence and Mortality Predictions to Observed Clinical Trial Results of Mammography Screening from Ages 40 to 49.

Authors:  Jeroen J van den Broek; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Jeanne S Mandelblatt; Hui Huang; Mehmet Ali Ergun; Elizabeth S Burnside; Cong Xu; Yisheng Li; Oguzhan Alagoz; Sandra J Lee; Natasha K Stout; Juhee Song; Amy Trentham-Dietz; Sylvia K Plevritis; Sue M Moss; Harry J de Koning
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 2.583

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.