Melanie Ruszczyk1, Gary Zirpoli2, Shicha Kumar3, Elisa V Bandera4,5, Dana H Bovbjerg6, Lina Jandorf7, Thaer Khoury8, Helena Hwang9, Gregory Ciupak10, Karen Pawlish11, Pepper Schedin12, Patricia Masso-Welch13, Christine B Ambrosone14, Chi-Chen Hong15. 1. Department of Biotechnical and Clinical Laboratory Sciences, University at Buffalo, 12 Capen Hall, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA. mur@buffalo.edu. 2. Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm & Carlton Sts., Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA. gary.zirpoli@roswellpark.org. 3. Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm & Carlton Sts., Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA. shicha.kumar@roswellpark.org. 4. Population Science/Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, 195 Little Albany St., New Brunswick, NJ, 08903, USA. banderel@cinj.rutgers.edu. 5. Department of Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, 683 Hoes Ln W, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA. banderel@cinj.rutgers.edu. 6. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, 5150 Centre Ave., Pittsburgh, PA, 15232, USA. bovbjergdh@upmc.edu. 7. Department of Oncology Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, 1428 Madison Ave., New York, NY, 10029, USA. lina.jandorf@mssn.edu. 8. Department of Pathology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm & Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA. thaer.khoury@roswellpark.org. 9. Department of Pathology, University of Texas, Southwestern Medical Center, 5325 Harry Hines Blvd., Dallas, TX, 75390, USA. helena.hwang@utsouthwestern.edu. 10. Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm & Carlton Sts., Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA. gregory.ciupak@roswellpark.org. 11. New Jersey State Cancer Registry, New Jersey Department of Health, 140 East Front Street, Trenton, NJ, 08625, USA. karen.pawlish@doh.state.nj.us. 12. Department of Cell, Development and Cancer Biology, Oregon Health Sciences University, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Pkwy, Portland, OR, 97239, USA. schedin@ohsu.edu. 13. Department of Biotechnical and Clinical Laboratory Sciences, University at Buffalo, 12 Capen Hall, Buffalo, NY, 14214, USA. pmwelch@buffalo.edu. 14. Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm & Carlton Sts., Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA. christine.ambrosone@roswellpark.org. 15. Department of Cancer Prevention and Control, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm & Carlton Sts., Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA. chi-chen.hong@roswellpark.org.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) is diagnosed with or without a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component. Previous analyses have found significant differences in tumor characteristics between pure IDC lacking DCIS and mixed IDC with DCIS. We will test our hypothesis that pure IDC represents a form of breast cancer with etiology and risk factors distinct from mixed IDC/DCIS. METHODS: We compared reproductive risk factors for breast cancer risk, as well as family and smoking history between 831 women with mixed IDC/DCIS (n = 650) or pure IDC (n = 181), and 1,620 controls, in the context of the Women's Circle of Health Study (WCHS), a case-control study of breast cancer in African-American and European-American women. Data on reproductive and lifestyle factors were collected during interviews, and tumor characteristics were abstracted from pathology reports. Case-control and case-case analyses were conducted using unconditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Most risk factors were similarly associated with pure IDC and mixed IDC/DCIS. However, among postmenopausal women, risk of pure IDC was lower in women with body mass index (BMI) 25 to <30 [odds ratio (OR) 0.66; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.35-1.23] and BMI ≥ 30 (OR 0.33; 95 % CI 0.18-0.67) compared to women with BMI < 25, with no associations with mixed IDC/DCIS. In case-case analyses, women who breastfed up to 12 months (OR 0.55; 95 % CI 0.32-0.94) or longer (OR 0.47; 95 % CI 0.26-0.87) showed decreased odds of pure IDC than mixed IDC/DCIS compared to those who did not breastfeed. CONCLUSIONS: Associations with some breast cancer risk factors differed between mixed IDC/DCIS and pure IDC, potentially suggesting differential developmental pathways. These findings, if confirmed in a larger study, will provide a better understanding of the developmental patterns of breast cancer and the influence of modifiable risk factors, which in turn could lead to better preventive measures for pure IDC, which have worse disease prognosis compared to mixed IDC/DCIS.
PURPOSE:Invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) is diagnosed with or without a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component. Previous analyses have found significant differences in tumor characteristics between pure IDC lacking DCIS and mixed IDC with DCIS. We will test our hypothesis that pure IDC represents a form of breast cancer with etiology and risk factors distinct from mixed IDC/DCIS. METHODS: We compared reproductive risk factors for breast cancer risk, as well as family and smoking history between 831 women with mixed IDC/DCIS (n = 650) or pure IDC (n = 181), and 1,620 controls, in the context of the Women's Circle of Health Study (WCHS), a case-control study of breast cancer in African-American and European-American women. Data on reproductive and lifestyle factors were collected during interviews, and tumor characteristics were abstracted from pathology reports. Case-control and case-case analyses were conducted using unconditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Most risk factors were similarly associated with pure IDC and mixed IDC/DCIS. However, among postmenopausal women, risk of pure IDC was lower in women with body mass index (BMI) 25 to <30 [odds ratio (OR) 0.66; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.35-1.23] and BMI ≥ 30 (OR 0.33; 95 % CI 0.18-0.67) compared to women with BMI < 25, with no associations with mixed IDC/DCIS. In case-case analyses, women who breastfed up to 12 months (OR 0.55; 95 % CI 0.32-0.94) or longer (OR 0.47; 95 % CI 0.26-0.87) showed decreased odds of pure IDC than mixed IDC/DCIS compared to those who did not breastfeed. CONCLUSIONS: Associations with some breast cancer risk factors differed between mixed IDC/DCIS and pure IDC, potentially suggesting differential developmental pathways. These findings, if confirmed in a larger study, will provide a better understanding of the developmental patterns of breast cancer and the influence of modifiable risk factors, which in turn could lead to better preventive measures for pure IDC, which have worse disease prognosis compared to mixed IDC/DCIS.
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast cancer; Cancer etiology; Cancer pathology; Ductal carcinoma in situ component; Risk factors
Authors: Liyu Jiang; Tingting Ma; Meena S Moran; Xiaoli Kong; Xiaoyan Li; Bruce G Haffty; Qifeng Yang Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: Maria Elena Martinez; Betsy C Wertheim; Loki Natarajan; Richard Schwab; Melissa Bondy; Adrian Daneri-Navarro; Maria Mercedes Meza-Montenegro; Luis Enrique Gutierrez-Millan; Abenaa Brewster; Ian K Komenaka; Patricia A Thompson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2013-08-15 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Edward A Ruiz-Narváez; Lynn Rosenberg; Song Yao; Charles N Rotimi; Adrienne L Cupples; Elisa V Bandera; Christine B Ambrosone; Lucile L Adams-Campbell; Julie R Palmer Journal: Carcinogenesis Date: 2012-10-26 Impact factor: 4.944
Authors: Christine B Ambrosone; Gregory L Ciupak; Elisa V Bandera; Lina Jandorf; Dana H Bovbjerg; Gary Zirpoli; Karen Pawlish; James Godbold; Helena Furberg; Anne Fatone; Heiddis Valdimarsdottir; Song Yao; Yulin Li; Helena Hwang; Warren Davis; Michelle Roberts; Lara Sucheston; Kitaw Demissie; Kandace L Amend; Paul Tartter; James Reilly; Benjamin W Pace; Thomas Rohan; Joseph Sparano; George Raptis; Maria Castaldi; Alison Estabrook; Sheldon Feldman; Christina Weltz; Margaret Kemeny Journal: J Oncol Date: 2009-10-25 Impact factor: 4.375
Authors: Mengmeng Jia; Zeni Wu; Emily Vogtmann; Katie M O'Brien; Clarice R Weinberg; Dale P Sandler; Gretchen L Gierach Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2020-07-29
Authors: Christos Petridis; Iteeka Arora; Vandna Shah; Anargyros Megalios; Charlotte Moss; Anca Mera; Angela Clifford; Cheryl Gillett; Sarah E Pinder; Ian Tomlinson; Rebecca Roylance; Michael A Simpson; Elinor J Sawyer Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2019-05-06 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Christos Petridis; Mark N Brook; Vandna Shah; Kelly Kohut; Patricia Gorman; Michele Caneppele; Dina Levi; Efterpi Papouli; Nick Orr; Angela Cox; Simon S Cross; Isabel Dos-Santos-Silva; Julian Peto; Anthony Swerdlow; Minouk J Schoemaker; Manjeet K Bolla; Qin Wang; Joe Dennis; Kyriaki Michailidou; Javier Benitez; Anna González-Neira; Daniel C Tessier; Daniel Vincent; Jingmei Li; Jonine Figueroa; Vessela Kristensen; Anne-Lise Borresen-Dale; Penny Soucy; Jacques Simard; Roger L Milne; Graham G Giles; Sara Margolin; Annika Lindblom; Thomas Brüning; Hiltrud Brauch; Melissa C Southey; John L Hopper; Thilo Dörk; Natalia V Bogdanova; Maria Kabisch; Ute Hamann; Rita K Schmutzler; Alfons Meindl; Hermann Brenner; Volker Arndt; Robert Winqvist; Katri Pylkäs; Peter A Fasching; Matthias W Beckmann; Jan Lubinski; Anna Jakubowska; Anna Marie Mulligan; Irene L Andrulis; Rob A E M Tollenaar; Peter Devilee; Loic Le Marchand; Christopher A Haiman; Arto Mannermaa; Veli-Matti Kosma; Paolo Radice; Paolo Peterlongo; Frederik Marme; Barbara Burwinkel; Carolien H M van Deurzen; Antoinette Hollestelle; Nicola Miller; Michael J Kerin; Diether Lambrechts; Giuseppe Floris; Jelle Wesseling; Henrik Flyger; Stig E Bojesen; Song Yao; Christine B Ambrosone; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Thérèse Truong; Pascal Guénel; Anja Rudolph; Jenny Chang-Claude; Heli Nevanlinna; Carl Blomqvist; Kamila Czene; Judith S Brand; Janet E Olson; Fergus J Couch; Alison M Dunning; Per Hall; Douglas F Easton; Paul D P Pharoah; Sarah E Pinder; Marjanka K Schmidt; Ian Tomlinson; Rebecca Roylance; Montserrat García-Closas; Elinor J Sawyer Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2016-02-17 Impact factor: 6.466