Rulla M Tamimi1, Celia Byrne, Graham A Colditz, Susan E Hankinson. 1. Channing Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 181 Longwood Ave, Boston, MA 02115, USA. rulla.tamimi@channing.harvard.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mammographic density and circulating sex hormones are two well-confirmed predictors of breast cancer risk. Whether mammographic density reflects levels of endogenous sex hormones is unclear. We examined whether these predictors are independently associated with breast cancer risk in a prospective study. METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study within the Nurses' Health Study cohort of 253 case subjects with breast cancer and 520 control subjects. All participants were postmenopausal women who were not using postmenopausal hormones at the time of both blood collection and mammography. Plasma levels of estradiol, free estradiol, testosterone, and free testosterone were evaluated. Mammographic density was assessed by use of computer-assisted analysis of mammograms. Logistic regression models that were adjusted for matching variables and potential confounders were used to calculate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Levels of circulating sex steroids and mammographic density were both statistically significantly and independently associated with breast cancer risk. The relative risk of breast cancer associated with mammographic density (RR for highest quartile compared with lowest quartile = 3.8, 95% CI = 2.2 to 6.6; P(trend)<.001) changed little when the analysis was adjusted for circulating estradiol (RR = 3.9, 95% CI = 2.2 to 6.9; P(trend)<.001) or circulating testosterone (RR = 4.1, 95% CI = 2.3 to 7.2; P(trend)<.001). Circulating levels of estradiol (RR = 2.4, 95% CI = 1.4 to 4.0) and of testosterone (RR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.2 to 3.1) were both associated with breast cancer risk, before and after adjustment for mammographic density. In a joint analysis of mammographic density and plasma testosterone, the risk of breast cancer was highest in the highest tertiles of both relative to the lowest tertiles of both (RR = 6.0, 95% CI = 2.6 to 14.0). A similar pattern was observed in the joint analysis of estradiol and mammographic density (RR = 4.1, 95% CI = 1.7 to 9.8). CONCLUSIONS: Circulating sex steroid levels and mammographic density appear strongly and independently associated with the risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women.
BACKGROUND: Mammographic density and circulating sex hormones are two well-confirmed predictors of breast cancer risk. Whether mammographic density reflects levels of endogenous sex hormones is unclear. We examined whether these predictors are independently associated with breast cancer risk in a prospective study. METHODS: We conducted a nested case-control study within the Nurses' Health Study cohort of 253 case subjects with breast cancer and 520 control subjects. All participants were postmenopausal women who were not using postmenopausal hormones at the time of both blood collection and mammography. Plasma levels of estradiol, free estradiol, testosterone, and free testosterone were evaluated. Mammographic density was assessed by use of computer-assisted analysis of mammograms. Logistic regression models that were adjusted for matching variables and potential confounders were used to calculate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Levels of circulating sex steroids and mammographic density were both statistically significantly and independently associated with breast cancer risk. The relative risk of breast cancer associated with mammographic density (RR for highest quartile compared with lowest quartile = 3.8, 95% CI = 2.2 to 6.6; P(trend)<.001) changed little when the analysis was adjusted for circulating estradiol (RR = 3.9, 95% CI = 2.2 to 6.9; P(trend)<.001) or circulating testosterone (RR = 4.1, 95% CI = 2.3 to 7.2; P(trend)<.001). Circulating levels of estradiol (RR = 2.4, 95% CI = 1.4 to 4.0) and of testosterone (RR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.2 to 3.1) were both associated with breast cancer risk, before and after adjustment for mammographic density. In a joint analysis of mammographic density and plasma testosterone, the risk of breast cancer was highest in the highest tertiles of both relative to the lowest tertiles of both (RR = 6.0, 95% CI = 2.6 to 14.0). A similar pattern was observed in the joint analysis of estradiol and mammographic density (RR = 4.1, 95% CI = 1.7 to 9.8). CONCLUSIONS: Circulating sex steroid levels and mammographic density appear strongly and independently associated with the risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women.
Authors: Shannon M Conroy; Christy G Woolcott; Karin R Koga; Celia Byrne; Chisato Nagata; Giske Ursin; Celine M Vachon; Martin J Yaffe; Ian Pagano; Gertraud Maskarinec Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2011-09-17 Impact factor: 7.396
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: Norman F Boyd; Lisa J Martin; Michael Bronskill; Martin J Yaffe; Neb Duric; Salomon Minkin Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2010-07-08 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Anieta M Sieuwerts; Giuseppina De Napoli; Anne van Galen; Helenius J Kloosterboer; Vanja de Weerd; Hong Zhang; John W M Martens; John A Foekens; Christian De Geyter Journal: Mol Oncol Date: 2011-09-16 Impact factor: 6.603
Authors: Valerie A McCormack; Anya Burton; Isabel dos-Santos-Silva; John H Hipwell; Caroline Dickens; Dorria Salem; Rasha Kamal; Mikael Hartman; Charmaine Pei Ling Lee; Kee-Seng Chia; Vahit Ozmen; Mustafa Erkin Aribal; Anath Arzee Flugelman; Martín Lajous; Ruy Lopez-Riduara; Megan Rice; Isabelle Romieu; Giske Ursin; Samera Qureshi; Huiyan Ma; Eunjung Lee; Carla H van Gils; Johanna O P Wanders; Sudhir Vinayak; Rose Ndumia; Steve Allen; Sarah Vinnicombe; Sue Moss; Jong Won Lee; Jisun Kim; Ana Pereira; Maria Luisa Garmendia; Reza Sirous; Mehri Sirous; Beata Peplonska; Agnieszka Bukowska; Rulla M Tamimi; Kimberly Bertrand; Chisato Nagata; Ava Kwong; Celine Vachon; Christopher Scott; Beatriz Perez-Gomez; Marina Pollan; Gertraud Maskarinec; Graham Giles; John Hopper; Jennifer Stone; Nadia Rajaram; Soo-Hwang Teo; Shivaani Mariapun; Martin J Yaffe; Joachim Schüz; Anna M Chiarelli; Linda Linton; Norman F Boyd Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Date: 2015-12-24 Impact factor: 2.984
Authors: Thomas P Ahern; Susan E Hankinson; Walter C Willett; Michael N Pollak; A Heather Eliassen; Rulla M Tamimi Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2013-10 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Robert W Mathes; Kathleen E Malone; Janet R Daling; Scott Davis; Sylvia M Lucas; Peggy L Porter; Christopher I Li Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 4.254