Literature DB >> 23703889

Age-related changes in mammographic density and breast cancer risk.

Mariëtte Lokate1, Rebecca K Stellato, Wouter B Veldhuis, Petra H M Peeters, Carla H van Gils.   

Abstract

High mammographic density is a strong breast cancer risk factor. Density normally declines with aging. We investigated whether the level of decline in mammographic density is related to breast cancer risk using a nested case-control study within the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)-Prospect cohort. This cohort was recruited among participants of a population-based breast cancer screening program in the Netherlands between 1993 and 1997. We examined whether age-related changes in mammographic density were different for 533 cases and 1,367 controls who were 49-69 years of age at the time of recruitment into the cohort. We used mixed models with linear and quadratic terms for age and interaction terms between age terms and case status. The percent mammographic density at the first available mammogram was higher for cases than for controls (25.2% vs. 22.5%) (P = 0.003). The average decline in density over 10 years was 11% in both cases and controls (P = 0.56). When studying changes among 4 categories of density, we saw some indication that large changes may influence breast cancer risk. Although no difference was seen in the average decline, we cannot exclude that large changes may influence breast cancer risk.

Entities:  

Keywords:  age; breast cancer; longitudinal studies; mammographic density; mixed effect model

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23703889     DOI: 10.1093/aje/kws446

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0002-9262            Impact factor:   4.897


  15 in total

1.  Mammographic Density Change and Risk of Breast Cancer.

Authors:  Shadi Azam; Mikael Eriksson; Arvid Sjölander; Roxanna Hellgren; Marike Gabrielson; Kamila Czene; Per Hall
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Longitudinal Changes in Volumetric Breast Density in Healthy Women across the Menopausal Transition.

Authors:  Natalie J Engmann; Christopher Scott; Matthew R Jensen; Stacey J Winham; Lin Ma; Kathleen R Brandt; Amir Mahmoudzadeh; Dana H Whaley; Carrie B Hruska; Fang-Fang Wu; Aaron D Norman; Robert A Hiatt; John Heine; John Shepherd; V Shane Pankratz; Diana L Miglioretti; Karla Kerlikowske; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2019-06-11       Impact factor: 4.254

3.  Breast cancer risk factors by mode of detection among screened women in the Cancer Prevention Study-II.

Authors:  Mia M Gaudet; Emily Deubler; W Ryan Diver; Samantha Puvanesarajah; Alpa V Patel; Ted Gansler; Mark E Sherman; Susan M Gapstur
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 4.  Reproductive Factors and Mammographic Density: Associations Among 24,840 Women and Comparison of Studies Using Digitized Film-Screen Mammography and Full-Field Digital Mammography.

Authors:  Stacey E Alexeeff; Nnaemeka U Odo; Russell McBride; Valerie McGuire; Ninah Achacoso; Joseph H Rothstein; Jafi A Lipson; Rhea Y Liang; Luana Acton; Martin J Yaffe; Alice S Whittemore; Daniel L Rubin; Weiva Sieh; Laurel A Habel
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2019-06-01       Impact factor: 4.897

5.  A case-case analysis of women with breast cancer: predictors of interval vs screen-detected cancer.

Authors:  Nickolas Dreher; Madeline Matthys; Edward Hadeler; Yiwey Shieh; Irene Acerbi; Fiona M McAuley; Michelle Melisko; Martin Eklund; Jeffrey A Tice; Laura J Esserman; Laura J Van't Veer
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2021-11-29       Impact factor: 4.624

Review 6.  Qualitative Versus Quantitative Mammographic Breast Density Assessment: Applications for the US and Abroad.

Authors:  Stamatia Destounis; Andrea Arieno; Renee Morgan; Christina Roberts; Ariane Chan
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2017-05-31

7.  Mammographic density and ageing: A collaborative pooled analysis of cross-sectional data from 22 countries worldwide.

Authors:  Anya Burton; Gertraud Maskarinec; Beatriz Perez-Gomez; Celine Vachon; Hui Miao; Martín Lajous; Ruy López-Ridaura; Megan Rice; Ana Pereira; Maria Luisa Garmendia; Rulla M Tamimi; Kimberly Bertrand; Ava Kwong; Giske Ursin; Eunjung Lee; Samera A Qureshi; Huiyan Ma; Sarah Vinnicombe; Sue Moss; Steve Allen; Rose Ndumia; Sudhir Vinayak; Soo-Hwang Teo; Shivaani Mariapun; Farhana Fadzli; Beata Peplonska; Agnieszka Bukowska; Chisato Nagata; Jennifer Stone; John Hopper; Graham Giles; Vahit Ozmen; Mustafa Erkin Aribal; Joachim Schüz; Carla H Van Gils; Johanna O P Wanders; Reza Sirous; Mehri Sirous; John Hipwell; Jisun Kim; Jong Won Lee; Caroline Dickens; Mikael Hartman; Kee-Seng Chia; Christopher Scott; Anna M Chiarelli; Linda Linton; Marina Pollan; Anath Arzee Flugelman; Dorria Salem; Rasha Kamal; Norman Boyd; Isabel Dos-Santos-Silva; Valerie McCormack
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 11.069

8.  Changes in mammographic density over time in breast cancer cases and women at high risk for breast cancer.

Authors:  Meghan E Work; Laura L Reimers; Anne S Quante; Katherine D Crew; Amy Whiffen; Mary Beth Terry
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2014-03-17       Impact factor: 7.396

9.  Tumor-host signaling interaction reveals a systemic, age-dependent splenic immune influence on tumor development.

Authors:  Afshin Beheshti; Justin Wage; J Tyson McDonald; Clare Lamont; Michael Peluso; Philip Hahnfeldt; Lynn Hlatky
Journal:  Oncotarget       Date:  2015-11-03

10.  Bayesian joint ordinal and survival modeling for breast cancer risk assessment.

Authors:  C Armero; C Forné; M Rué; A Forte; H Perpiñán; G Gómez; M Baré
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2016-08-14       Impact factor: 2.373

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.