Literature DB >> 19124487

The relative importance of genetics and environment on mammographic density.

Giske Ursin1, Elizabeth O Lillie, Eunjung Lee, Myles Cockburn, Nicholas J Schork, Wendy Cozen, Yuri R Parisky, Ann S Hamilton, Melvin A Astrahan, Thomas Mack.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although several environmental factors predict mammographic density, estimates of its heritability have been quite high. We investigated whether part of the presumed heritability might be attributed to differential sharing of modifiable risk factors in monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins.
METHODS: We measured percent and absolute mammographic density using mammograms from 257 MZ and 296 DZ twin pairs. The correlation of intrapair mammographic density was compared according to zygosity across strata of modifiable risk factors. Portions of variance attributable to additive genetic factors, shared environment, and individual environment were calculated using a variance component methodology in the entire set, and within twin pairs stratified by environmental trait similarity.
RESULTS: Both percent density and absolute mammographic density were more highly correlated between MZ twins than DZ twins, but the correlations varied across strata. Body mass index (BMI) and parity strongly predicted differences in mammographic density within MZ twin pairs. After adjusting for covariates, 53% of the total variance in percent density and 59% of that in absolute density seemed attributable to genetic effects, but these estimates varied greatly by stratum. For twins dissimilar on BMI (difference >2.5 kg/m(2)), the additive genetic component of absolute density was estimated at only 20% (+/-19%), and the common and individual environment at 21% (+/-14%) and 49%, respectively (P value for heterogeneity across BMI = 0.0001).
CONCLUSION: Our results confirm that the genome is an important determinant of mammographic density but suggest that an unknown portion of the mammographic density effect attributed to the genome may be due to shared modifiable environmental factors.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19124487     DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2857

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev        ISSN: 1055-9965            Impact factor:   4.254


  37 in total

Review 1.  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

Review 2.  Breast tissue composition and susceptibility to breast cancer.

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

3.  CD36 repression activates a multicellular stromal program shared by high mammographic density and tumor tissues.

Authors:  Rosa Anna DeFilippis; Hang Chang; Nancy Dumont; Joseph T Rabban; Yunn-Yi Chen; Gerald V Fontenay; Hal K Berman; Mona L Gauthier; Jianxin Zhao; Donglei Hu; James J Marx; Judy A Tjoe; Elad Ziv; Maria Febbraio; Karla Kerlikowske; Bahram Parvin; Thea D Tlsty
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2012-07-09       Impact factor: 39.397

4.  Distribution of mammographic density and its influential factors among Chinese women.

Authors:  Hongji Dai; Ye Yan; Peishan Wang; Peifang Liu; Yali Cao; Li Xiong; Yahong Luo; Tie Pan; Xiangjun Ma; Jie Wang; Zhenhua Yang; Xueou Liu; Chuan Chen; Yubei Huang; Yi Li; Yaogang Wang; Xishan Hao; Zhaoxiang Ye; Kexin Chen
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  2014-03-16       Impact factor: 7.196

5.  Longitudinal Study of Mammographic Density Measures That Predict Breast Cancer Risk.

Authors:  Kavitha Krishnan; Laura Baglietto; Jennifer Stone; Julie A Simpson; Gianluca Severi; Christopher F Evans; Robert J MacInnis; Graham G Giles; Carmel Apicella; John L Hopper
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2017-01-06       Impact factor: 4.254

6.  Mammographic density and breast cancer risk by family history in women of white and Asian ancestry.

Authors:  Gertraud Maskarinec; Kaylae L Nakamura; Christy G Woolcott; Shannon M Conroy; Celia Byrne; Chisato Nagata; Giske Ursin; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 2.506

7.  Expression levels of uridine 5'-diphospho-glucuronosyltransferase genes in breast tissue from healthy women are associated with mammographic density.

Authors:  Vilde D Haakensen; Margarethe Biong; Ole Christian Lingjærde; Marit Muri Holmen; Jan Ole Frantzen; Ying Chen; Dina Navjord; Linda Romundstad; Torben Lüders; Ida K Bukholm; Hiroko K Solvang; Vessela N Kristensen; Giske Ursin; Anne-Lise Børresen-Dale; Aslaug Helland
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2010-08-27       Impact factor: 6.466

8.  Genetic variation in transforming growth factor beta 1 and mammographic density in Singapore Chinese women.

Authors:  Eunjung Lee; David Van Den Berg; Chris Hsu; Giske Ursin; Woon-Puay Koh; Jian-Min Yuan; Daniel O Stram; Mimi C Yu; Anna H Wu
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 9.  Mammographic density.

Authors:  Norman F Boyd; Lisa J Martin; Martin Yaffe; Salomon Minkin
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2009-12-18       Impact factor: 6.466

10.  Sex steroid metabolism polymorphisms and mammographic density in pre- and early perimenopausal women.

Authors:  Carolyn J Crandall; Mary E Sehl; Sybil L Crawford; Ellen B Gold; Laurel A Habel; Lesley M Butler; Maryfran R Sowers; Gail A Greendale; Janet S Sinsheimer
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2009-07-27       Impact factor: 6.466

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.