BACKGROUND:Mammographic density is a risk factor for breast cancer. Mammographic density and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) volume (MRIV) assess the amount of fibroglandular tissue in the breast. Mammographic density and MRIV can be modulated with hormonal interventions, suggesting that these imaging modalities may be useful as surrogate endpoint biomarkers for breast cancer chemoprevention trials. We evaluated the effect of raloxifene on mammographic density and MRIV in premenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer. METHODS: Mammograms and MRI were obtained at baseline and after 1 and 2 years of 60 mg raloxifene by mouth daily for 27 premenopausal women. Mammographic percent dense area was calculated using a semiquantitative thresholding technique. T(1)-weighted spoiled gradient-echo MRI with fat suppression was used to determine breast MRIV using a semiautomatic method. Mean change in mammographic density and median change in MRIV were assessed by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: No significant change in mammographic density was seen after treatment with raloxifene. Mean change after 1 year was 1% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), -3 to +5] and after 2 years was 1% (95% CI, -2 to +5). MRIV decreased on raloxifene. Median relative change in MRIV after 1 year was -17% (95% CI, -28 to -9; P = 0.0017) and after 2 years was -16% (95% CI, -31 to -4; P = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk premenopausal women, mammographic density did not change on raloxifene, whereas MRIV significantly declined. Our findings suggest that MRIV is a promising surrogate biomarker in premenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer and should be investigated further in breast cancer prevention trials.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Mammographic density is a risk factor for breast cancer. Mammographic density and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) volume (MRIV) assess the amount of fibroglandular tissue in the breast. Mammographic density and MRIV can be modulated with hormonal interventions, suggesting that these imaging modalities may be useful as surrogate endpoint biomarkers for breast cancer chemoprevention trials. We evaluated the effect of raloxifene on mammographic density and MRIV in premenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer. METHODS: Mammograms and MRI were obtained at baseline and after 1 and 2 years of 60 mg raloxifene by mouth daily for 27 premenopausal women. Mammographic percent dense area was calculated using a semiquantitative thresholding technique. T(1)-weighted spoiled gradient-echo MRI with fat suppression was used to determine breast MRIV using a semiautomatic method. Mean change in mammographic density and median change in MRIV were assessed by the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: No significant change in mammographic density was seen after treatment with raloxifene. Mean change after 1 year was 1% [95% confidence interval (95% CI), -3 to +5] and after 2 years was 1% (95% CI, -2 to +5). MRIV decreased on raloxifene. Median relative change in MRIV after 1 year was -17% (95% CI, -28 to -9; P = 0.0017) and after 2 years was -16% (95% CI, -31 to -4; P = 0.0004). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk premenopausal women, mammographic density did not change on raloxifene, whereas MRIV significantly declined. Our findings suggest that MRIV is a promising surrogate biomarker in premenopausal women at increased risk for breast cancer and should be investigated further in breast cancer prevention trials.
Authors: Y P Guo; L J Martin; W Hanna; D Banerjee; N Miller; E Fishell; R Khokha; N F Boyd Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Norman Boyd; Lisa Martin; Jennifer Stone; Laurie Little; Salomon Minkin; Martin Yaffe Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2002-10 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: M M Lee; N L Petrakis; M R Wrensch; E B King; R Miike; E Sickles Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 1994 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 4.254
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: C K Chow; D Venzon; E C Jones; A Premkumar; J O'Shaughnessy; J Zujewski Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: George E Christodoulakos; Irene V Lambrinoudaki; Athina D Vourtsi; Konstantinos P C Panoulis; Dimitrios A Kelekis; George C Creatsas Journal: Menopause Date: 2002 Mar-Apr Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Norman F Boyd; Gillian S Dite; Jennifer Stone; Anoma Gunasekara; Dallas R English; Margaret R E McCredie; Graham G Giles; David Tritchler; Anna Chiarelli; Martin J Yaffe; John L Hopper Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-09-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Daniel H-E Chang; Jeon-Hor Chen; Muqing Lin; Shadfar Bahri; Hon J Yu; Rita S Mehta; Ke Nie; David J B Hsiang; Orhan Nalcioglu; Min-Ying Su Journal: Med Phys Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 4.071
Authors: Valencia King; Yajia Gu; Jennifer B Kaplan; Jennifer D Brooks; Malcolm C Pike; Elizabeth A Morris Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-07-04 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Anna H Wu; Darcy Spicer; Agustin Garcia; Chiu-Chen Tseng; Linda Hovanessian-Larsen; Pulin Sheth; Sue Ellen Martin; Debra Hawes; Christy Russell; Heather MacDonald; Debu Tripathy; Min-Ying Su; Giske Ursin; Malcolm C Pike Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2015-08-14
Authors: Ke Nie; Daniel Chang; Jeon-Hor Chen; Tzu-Ching Shih; Chieh-Chih Hsu; Orhan Nalcioglu; Min-Ying Su Journal: Med Phys Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 4.071