OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study systematically compared mammographic density with histology in women receiving or not receiving menopausal hormone therapy (HT). DESIGN: This study was approved by the institutional review board. Twenty-eight postmenopausal women using HT were matched with 28 postmenopausal women not using HT at the time of breast cancer diagnosis. Noncancerous tissue from mastectomy specimens was examined histologically to quantitate the content of fibrous stroma, ducts, and lobule types 1, 2, and 3. Tissue samples were also evaluated for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and Ki67 activity in the ducts and lobules. Breast density was quantified by digitizing the contralateral mammogram and computer-assisted interactive thresholding. RESULTS: High breast density in women using HT was correlated with greater fibrous stroma (P = 0.020) and lobule type 1 (P = 0.016). Breast density also correlated with Ki67 activity in the ducts (P = 0.031) and lobules (P= 0.023) for both groups combined. Estrogen and progesterone receptors did not correlate with either breast density or HT use. CONCLUSIONS: Increased fibrous stroma and lobule type 1 are associated with increasing mammographic density in women using HT, independent of estrogen and progesterone receptor up-regulation. These findings suggest that increased breast density may be mediated through a paracrine effect. The increase in breast cancer risk with HT use may be due to an increase in target lobule type 1 cells.
OBJECTIVE: This retrospective study systematically compared mammographic density with histology in women receiving or not receiving menopausal hormone therapy (HT). DESIGN: This study was approved by the institutional review board. Twenty-eight postmenopausal women using HT were matched with 28 postmenopausal women not using HT at the time of breast cancer diagnosis. Noncancerous tissue from mastectomy specimens was examined histologically to quantitate the content of fibrous stroma, ducts, and lobule types 1, 2, and 3. Tissue samples were also evaluated for estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and Ki67 activity in the ducts and lobules. Breast density was quantified by digitizing the contralateral mammogram and computer-assisted interactive thresholding. RESULTS: High breast density in women using HT was correlated with greater fibrous stroma (P = 0.020) and lobule type 1 (P = 0.016). Breast density also correlated with Ki67 activity in the ducts (P = 0.031) and lobules (P= 0.023) for both groups combined. Estrogen and progesterone receptors did not correlate with either breast density or HT use. CONCLUSIONS: Increased fibrous stroma and lobule type 1 are associated with increasing mammographic density in women using HT, independent of estrogen and progesterone receptor up-regulation. These findings suggest that increased breast density may be mediated through a paracrine effect. The increase in breast cancer risk with HT use may be due to an increase in target lobule type 1 cells.
Authors: E B Gold; J Bromberger; S Crawford; S Samuels; G A Greendale; S D Harlow; J Skurnick Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 2001-05-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: M Freedman; J San Martin; J O'Gorman; S Eckert; M E Lippman; S C Lo; E L Walls; J Zeng Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2001-01-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Marcia L Stefanick; Garnet L Anderson; Karen L Margolis; Susan L Hendrix; Rebecca J Rodabough; Electra D Paskett; Dorothy S Lane; F Allan Hubbell; Annlouise R Assaf; Gloria E Sarto; Robert S Schenken; Shagufta Yasmeen; Lawrence Lessin; Rowan T Chlebowski Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-04-12 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Valerie P Jackson; Javier A San Martin; Roberta J Secrest; Michelle McNabb; Sebastian Carranza-Lira; Pedro Figueroa-Casas; César E Fernandes; Josefina Romaguera Journal: Am J Obstet Gynecol Date: 2003-02 Impact factor: 8.661
Authors: G A Greendale; B A Reboussin; A Sie; H R Singh; L K Olson; O Gatewood; L W Bassett; C Wasilauskas; T Bush; E Barrett-Connor Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 1999-02-16 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Celine M Vachon; Hironobu Sasano; Karthik Ghosh; Kathleen R Brandt; David A Watson; Carol Reynolds; Wilma L Lingle; Paul E Goss; Rong Li; Sarah E Aiyar; Christopher G Scott; V Shane Pankratz; Richard J Santen; James N Ingle Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-06-05 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Mark E Sherman; Jonine D Figueroa; Jill E Henry; Susan E Clare; Connie Rufenbarger; Anna Maria Storniolo Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2012-02-17
Authors: Jason J Northey; Alexander S Barrett; Irene Acerbi; Mary-Kate Hayward; Stephanie Talamantes; Ivory S Dean; Janna K Mouw; Suzanne M Ponik; Jonathon N Lakins; Po-Jui Huang; Junmin Wu; Quanming Shi; Susan Samson; Patricia J Keely; Rita A Mukhtar; Jan T Liphardt; John A Shepherd; E Shelley Hwang; Yunn-Yi Chen; Kirk C Hansen; Laurie E Littlepage; Valerie M Weaver Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 2020-11-02 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Brad M Keller; Diane L Nathan; Yan Wang; Yuanjie Zheng; James C Gee; Emily F Conant; Despina Kontos Journal: Med Phys Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Karthik Ghosh; Kathleen R Brandt; Carol Reynolds; Christopher G Scott; V S Pankratz; Darren L Riehle; Wilma L Lingle; Tonye Odogwu; Derek C Radisky; Daniel W Visscher; James N Ingle; Lynn C Hartmann; Celine M Vachon Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-08-30 Impact factor: 4.872
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
Authors: Celine M Vachon; Vera J Suman; Kathleen R Brandt; Matthew L Kosel; Aman U Buzdar; Janet E Olson; Fang-Fang Wu; Lynn M Flickinger; Giske Ursin; Catherine R Elliott; Lois Shepherd; Richard M Weinshilboum; Paul E Goss; James N Ingle Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-03-06 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Martijn Verheus; Gertraud Maskarinec; Eva Erber; Jana S Steude; Jeffrey Killeen; Brenda Y Hernandez; J Mark Cline Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2009-06-13 Impact factor: 4.430