Nadia Rajaram1,2, Shivaani Mariapun1, Mikael Eriksson3, Jose Tapia3, Pui Yoke Kwan1, Weang Kee Ho2, Faizah Harun4, Kartini Rahmat4,5, Kamila Czene3, Nur Aishah Mohd Taib4, Per Hall3,6, Soo Hwang Teo7,8. 1. Cancer Research Malaysia, 1 Jalan SS12/1A, 47500, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. 2. Department of Applied Mathematics, Faculty of Engineering, University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus, Jalan Broga, 43500, Semenyih, Selangor, Malaysia. 3. Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Box 281, 171 77, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Breast Cancer Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University Malaya Cancer Research Institute, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 5. Biomedical Imaging Department, University Malaya Medical Centre, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 6. Department of Radiology, South General Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. 7. Cancer Research Malaysia, 1 Jalan SS12/1A, 47500, Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. soohwang.teo@cancerresearch.my. 8. Breast Cancer Research Unit, Faculty of Medicine, University Malaya Cancer Research Institute, University of Malaya, 50603, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. soohwang.teo@cancerresearch.my.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Mammographic density is a measurable and modifiable biomarker that is strongly and independently associated with breast cancer risk. Paradoxically, although Asian women have lower risk of breast cancer, studies of minority Asian women in predominantly Caucasian populations have found that Asian women have higher percent density. In this cross-sectional study, we compared the distribution of mammographic density for a matched cohort of Asian women from Malaysia and Caucasian women from Sweden, and determined if variations in mammographic density could be attributed to population differences in breast cancer risk factors. METHODS: Volumetric mammographic density was compared for 1501 Malaysian and 4501 Swedish healthy women, matched on age and body mass index. We used multivariable log-linear regression to determine the risk factors associated with mammographic density and mediation analysis to identify factors that account for differences in mammographic density between the two cohorts. RESULTS: Compared to Caucasian women, percent density was 2.0% higher among Asian women (p < 0.001), and dense volume was 5.7 cm3 higher among pre-menopausal Asian women (p < 0.001). Dense volume was 3.0 cm3 lower among post-menopausal Asian women (p = 0.009) compared to post-menopausal Caucasian women, and this difference was attributed to population differences in height, weight, and parity (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that among post-menopausal women, population differences in mammographic density and risk to breast cancer may be accounted for by height, weight, and parity. Given that pre-menopausal Asian and Caucasian women have similar population risk to breast cancer but different dense volume, development of more appropriate biomarkers of risk in pre-menopausal women is required.
PURPOSE: Mammographic density is a measurable and modifiable biomarker that is strongly and independently associated with breast cancer risk. Paradoxically, although Asian women have lower risk of breast cancer, studies of minority Asian women in predominantly Caucasian populations have found that Asian women have higher percent density. In this cross-sectional study, we compared the distribution of mammographic density for a matched cohort of Asian women from Malaysia and Caucasian women from Sweden, and determined if variations in mammographic density could be attributed to population differences in breast cancer risk factors. METHODS: Volumetric mammographic density was compared for 1501 Malaysian and 4501 Swedish healthy women, matched on age and body mass index. We used multivariable log-linear regression to determine the risk factors associated with mammographic density and mediation analysis to identify factors that account for differences in mammographic density between the two cohorts. RESULTS: Compared to Caucasian women, percent density was 2.0% higher among Asian women (p < 0.001), and dense volume was 5.7 cm3 higher among pre-menopausal Asian women (p < 0.001). Dense volume was 3.0 cm3 lower among post-menopausal Asian women (p = 0.009) compared to post-menopausal Caucasian women, and this difference was attributed to population differences in height, weight, and parity (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that among post-menopausal women, population differences in mammographic density and risk to breast cancer may be accounted for by height, weight, and parity. Given that pre-menopausal Asian and Caucasian women have similar population risk to breast cancer but different dense volume, development of more appropriate biomarkers of risk in pre-menopausal women is required.
Entities:
Keywords:
Asian; Breast cancer; Caucasian; Mammographic density; Risk
Authors: Hyuna Sung; Changyuan Guo; Erni Li; Jing Li; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Jennifer L Guida; Renata Cora; Nan Hu; Joseph Deng; Jonine D Figueroa; Mark E Sherman; Gretchen L Gierach; Ning Lu; Xiaohong R Yang Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2019-01-07 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Erica A Golemis; Paul Scheet; Tim N Beck; Eward M Scolnick; David J Hunter; Ernest Hawk; Nancy Hopkins Journal: Genes Dev Date: 2018-06-26 Impact factor: 11.361
Authors: Erni Li; Jennifer L Guida; Yuan Tian; Hyuna Sung; Hela Koka; Mengjie Li; Ariane Chan; Han Zhang; Eric Tang; Changyuan Guo; Joseph Deng; Nan Hu; Ning Lu; Gretchen L Gierach; Jing Li; Xiaohong R Yang Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2019-06-28 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Sarocha Chootipongchaivat; Xin Yi Wong; Kevin Ten Haaf; Mikael Hartman; Kelvin B Tan; Nicolien T van Ravesteyn; Hwee-Lin Wee Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2021-02-02 Impact factor: 4.090
Authors: Tengku Muhammad Hanis; Wan Nor Arifin; Juhara Haron; Wan Faiziah Wan Abdul Rahman; Nur Intan Raihana Ruhaiyem; Rosni Abdullah; Kamarul Imran Musa Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2022-03-30
Authors: Marina T van Leeuwen; Michael O Falster; Claire M Vajdic; Philip J Crowe; Sanja Lujic; Elizabeth Klaes; Louisa Jorm; Art Sedrakyan Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-04-10 Impact factor: 2.692