Literature DB >> 24131968

Mammographic density, MRI background parenchymal enhancement and breast cancer risk.

M C Pike1, C L Pearce.   

Abstract

Mammographic density (MD), representing connective and epithelial tissue (fibroglandular tissue, FGT) is a major risk factor for breast cancer. In an analysis of an autopsy series (Bartow SA, Pathak DR, Mettler FA. Radiographic microcalcification and parenchymal patterns as indicators of histologic "high-risk" benign breast disease. Cancer 1990; 66: 1721-1725, Bartow SA, Pathak DR, Mettler FA et al. Breast mammographic pattern: a concatenation of confounding and breast cancer risk factors. Am J Epidemiol 1995; 142: 813-819), MD was found to be strongly correlated with the collagen and epithelial content of the breast (Li T, Sun L, Miller N et al. The association of measured breast tissue characteristics with MD and other risk factors for breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14: 343-349), and another report showed that breast epithelium was highly concentrated in the areas of collagen concentration (Hawes D, Downey S, Pearce CL et al. Dense breast stromal tissue shows greatly increased concentration of breast epithelium but no increase in its proliferative activity. Breast Cancer Res 2006; 8: R24). Collagen comprises the overwhelming majority of the FGT, occupying an area on the slides obtained from the autopsy series some 15 times the area of glandular tissue. The relationship of MD with breast cancer risk appears likely to be due to a major extent to increasing epithelial cell numbers with increasing MD. FGT is also seen in breast magnetic resonance imaging (breast MRI) and, as expected, it has been shown that this measure of FGT (MRI-FGT) is highly correlated with MD. A contrast-enhanced breast MRI shows that normal FGT 'enhances' (background parenchymal enhancement, BPE) after contrast agent is administered(Morris EA. Diagnostic breast MR imaging: current status and future directions. Radiol Clin North Am 2007; 45: 863-880, vii., Kuhl C. The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology 2007; 244: 356-378), and a recent study suggests that BPE is also a major breast cancer risk factor, possibly as important as, and independent of MD (King V, Brooks JD, Bernstein JL et al. BPE at breast MR imaging and breast cancer risk. Radiology 2011; 260: 50-60). BPE is much more sensitive to the effects of menopause and tamoxifen than is FGT (King V, Gu Y, Kaplan JB et al. Impact of menopausal status on BPE and fibroglandular tissue on breast MRI. Eur Radiol 2012; 22: 2641-2647, King V, Kaplan J, Pike MC et al. Impact of tamoxifen on amount of fibroglandular tissue, BPE, and cysts on breast MRI. Breast J 2012; 18: 527-534). Changes in MD and BPE may be most useful in predicting response to chemopreventive agents aimed at blocking breast cell proliferation. More study of the biological basis of the effects of MD and BPE is needed if we are to fully exploit these factors in developing chemopreventive approaches to breast cancer.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast MRI; breast background parenchymal enhancement; breast cancer; mammographic density

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24131968      PMCID: PMC3894109          DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdt310

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Oncol        ISSN: 0923-7534            Impact factor:   32.976


  43 in total

1.  The association of measured breast tissue characteristics with mammographic density and other risk factors for breast cancer.

Authors:  Tong Li; Limei Sun; Naomi Miller; Trudey Nicklee; Jennifer Woo; Lee Hulse-Smith; Ming-Sound Tsao; Rama Khokha; Lisa Martin; Norman Boyd
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2005-02       Impact factor: 4.254

2.  Reduced mammographic density with use of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist-based chemoprevention regimen in BRCA1 carriers.

Authors:  Jeffrey N Weitzel; Saundra S Buys; William H Sherman; AnnaMarie Daniels; Giske Ursin; John R Daniels; Deborah J MacDonald; Kathleen R Blazer; Malcolm C Pike; Darcy V Spicer
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2007-01-15       Impact factor: 12.531

Review 3.  Diagnostic breast MR imaging: current status and future directions.

Authors:  Elizabeth A Morris
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 4.  The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice.

Authors:  Christiane Kuhl
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Comparison of effect estimates from a meta-analysis of summary data from published studies and from a meta-analysis using individual patient data for ovarian cancer studies.

Authors:  K K Steinberg; S J Smith; D F Stroup; I Olkin; N C Lee; G D Williamson; S B Thacker
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1997-05-15       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Magnetic resonance imaging for secondary assessment of breast density in a high-risk cohort.

Authors:  Catherine Klifa; Julio Carballido-Gamio; Lisa Wilmes; Anne Laprie; John Shepherd; Jessica Gibbs; Bo Fan; Susan Noworolski; Nola Hylton
Journal:  Magn Reson Imaging       Date:  2009-07-23       Impact factor: 2.546

7.  Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study.

Authors:  B Fisher; J P Costantino; D L Wickerham; C K Redmond; M Kavanah; W M Cronin; V Vogel; A Robidoux; N Dimitrov; J Atkins; M Daly; S Wieand; E Tan-Chiu; L Ford; N Wolmark
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1998-09-16       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Greatly increased occurrence of breast cancers in areas of mammographically dense tissue.

Authors:  Giske Ursin; Linda Hovanessian-Larsen; Yuri R Parisky; Malcolm C Pike; Anna H Wu
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2005-06-08       Impact factor: 6.466

9.  Dense breast stromal tissue shows greatly increased concentration of breast epithelium but no increase in its proliferative activity.

Authors:  Debra Hawes; Susan Downey; Celeste Leigh Pearce; Sue Bartow; Peggy Wan; Malcolm C Pike; Anna H Wu
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2006-04-28       Impact factor: 6.466

Review 10.  Mammographic density. Potential mechanisms of breast cancer risk associated with mammographic density: hypotheses based on epidemiological evidence.

Authors:  Lisa J Martin; Norman F Boyd
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2008-01-09       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  23 in total

1.  Quantitative evaluation of background parenchymal enhancement (BPE) on breast MRI. A feasibility study with a semi-automatic and automatic software compared to observer-based scores.

Authors:  Alberto Tagliafico; Bianca Bignotti; Giulio Tagliafico; Simona Tosto; Alessio Signori; Massimo Calabrese
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2015-10-14       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Classification of Background Parenchymal Uptake on Molecular Breast Imaging Using a Convolutional Neural Network.

Authors:  Rickey E Carter; Zachi I Attia; Jennifer R Geske; Amy Lynn Conners; Dana H Whaley; Katie N Hunt; Michael K O'Connor; Deborah J Rhodes; Carrie B Hruska
Journal:  JCO Clin Cancer Inform       Date:  2019-02

3.  Impact of Henda's law on the utilization of screening breast magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Callan Mason; Kendall Yokubaitis; Evan Howard; Zeeshan Shah; Jean Wang
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2015-01

Review 4.  Evaluation of background parenchymal enhancement on breast MRI: a systematic review.

Authors:  Bianca Bignotti; Alessio Signori; Francesca Valdora; Federica Rossi; Massimo Calabrese; Manuela Durando; Giovanna Mariscotto; Alberto Tagliafico
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 3.039

5.  Dose-response effects of aerobic exercise on estrogen among women at high risk for breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Kathryn H Schmitz; Nancy I Williams; Despina Kontos; Susan Domchek; Knashawn H Morales; Wei-Ting Hwang; Lorita L Grant; Laura DiGiovanni; Domenick Salvatore; Desire' Fenderson; Mitchell Schnall; Mary Lou Galantino; Jill Stopfer; Mindy S Kurzer; Shandong Wu; Jessica Adelman; Justin C Brown; Jerene Good
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Concentration analysis of breast tissue phantoms with terahertz spectroscopy.

Authors:  Bao C Q Truong; Anthony J Fitzgerald; Shuting Fan; Vincent P Wallace
Journal:  Biomed Opt Express       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 3.732

7.  Determinants of the reliability of ultrasound tomography sound speed estimates as a surrogate for volumetric breast density.

Authors:  Zeina G Khodr; Mark A Sak; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Nebojsa Duric; Peter Littrup; Lisa Bey-Knight; Haythem Ali; Patricia Vallieres; Mark E Sherman; Gretchen L Gierach
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 4.071

8.  The Mammary Tumor Microenvironment.

Authors:  Colleen S Curran; Suzanne M Ponik
Journal:  Adv Exp Med Biol       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 2.622

9.  The Dose-Response Effects of Aerobic Exercise on Body Composition and Breast Tissue among Women at High Risk for Breast Cancer: A Randomized Trial.

Authors:  Justin C Brown; Despina Kontos; Mitchell D Schnall; Shandong Wu; Kathryn H Schmitz
Journal:  Cancer Prev Res (Phila)       Date:  2016-04-20

10.  Digital histologic analysis reveals morphometric patterns of age-related involution in breast epithelium and stroma.

Authors:  Rupninder Sandhu; Lynn Chollet-Hinton; Erin L Kirk; Bentley Midkiff; Melissa A Troester
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  2015-10-23       Impact factor: 3.466

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.