Literature DB >> 27615710

Longitudinal fluctuation in mammographic percent density differentiates between interval and screen-detected breast cancer.

Fredrik Strand1,2, Keith Humphreys1,3, Mikael Eriksson1, Jingmei Li1,4, Therese M L Andersson1, Sven Törnberg5, Edward Azavedo2,6, John Shepherd7, Per Hall1, Kamila Czene1.   

Abstract

Interval breast cancer (IC) has a more aggressive phenotype and higher mortality than screen-detected cancer (SDC). In this case-case study, we investigated whether the size of longitudinal fluctuations in mammographic percent density (PD fluctuation) was associated with the ratio of IC versus SDC among screened women with breast cancer. The primary study population consisted of 1,414 postmenopausal breast cancer cases, and the validation population of 1,241 cases. We calculated PD fluctuation as the quadratic mean of deviations between actual PD and the long-term trend estimated by a mixed effects model. In a logistic regression model we examined the association between PD fluctuation and IC versus SDC including adjustments for PD at last screening, age at diagnosis, BMI and hormone replacement therapy. All statistical tests were two-sided. There were 385 IC and 1,029 SDC in the primary study population, with PD fluctuations of 0.44 and 0.41 respectively (p = 0.0309). After adjustments, PD fluctuation was associated with an increased ratio of IC versus SDC, with an estimated per-standard deviation odds ratio of 1.17 (95% CI = 1.03-1.33), compared to 1.19 (95% CI = 1.04-1.38) in the validation population. In screened women with breast cancer, high fluctuation in mammographic percent density was associated with an increased ratio of IC versus SDC. Whether this is entirely related to a reduced mammographic detectability or to a biological phenotype promoting faster tumor growth remains to be elucidated.
© 2016 UICC.

Entities:  

Keywords:  breast cancer; cancer screening; early detection; interval cancer; longitudinal study; mammographic density; mammography

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27615710     DOI: 10.1002/ijc.30427

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Cancer        ISSN: 0020-7136            Impact factor:   7.396


  5 in total

Review 1.  A review of the influence of mammographic density on breast cancer clinical and pathological phenotype.

Authors:  Michael S Shawky; Cecilia W Huo; Kara Britt; Erik W Thompson; Michael A Henderson; Andrew Redfern
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2019-06-08       Impact factor: 4.872

2.  Derived mammographic masking measures based on simulated lesions predict the risk of interval cancer after controlling for known risk factors: a case-case analysis.

Authors:  Benjamin Hinton; Lin Ma; Amir Pasha Mahmoudzadeh; Serghei Malkov; Bo Fan; Heather Greenwood; Bonnie Joe; Vivian Lee; Fredrik Strand; Karla Kerlikowske; John Shepherd
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2019-02-14       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Associations of Oral Contraceptives with Mammographic Breast Density in Premenopausal Women.

Authors:  Lusine Yaghjyan; Carmen Smotherman; John Heine; Graham A Colditz; Bernard Rosner; Rulla M Tamimi
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2021-12-03       Impact factor: 4.090

4.  Automated volumetric breast density measures: differential change between breasts in women with and without breast cancer.

Authors:  Kathleen R Brandt; Christopher G Scott; Diana L Miglioretti; Matthew R Jensen; Amir P Mahmoudzadeh; Carrie Hruska; Lin Ma; Fang Fang Wu; Steven R Cummings; Aaron D Norman; Natalie J Engmann; John A Shepherd; Stacey J Winham; Karla Kerlikowske; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2019-10-28       Impact factor: 6.466

5.  Mammography features for early markers of aggressive breast cancer subtypes and tumor characteristics: A population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Pui San Tan; Maya Alsheh Ali; Mikael Eriksson; Per Hall; Keith Humphreys; Kamila Czene
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 7.396

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.