Literature DB >> 8547541

A nested case-control study of mammographic patterns, breast volume, and breast cancer (New York City, NY, United States).

I Kato1, C Beinart, A Bleich, S Su, M Kim, P G Toniolo.   

Abstract

The relations of Wolfe mammographic patterns, quantitative mammographic densities, and mammographically estimated breast size to breast cancer risk were investigated prospectively in a case-control study nested in the New York University Women's Health Study, a cohort of 14,291 women in New York City, NY (United States). The archived mammograms of 197 breast cancer cases who were identified during the first 5.5 years of the study and of 521 individually matched controls from the same cohort were retrieved and classified according to Wolfe parenchymal patterns and mammographic densities by two expert radiologists. Breast size and volume were estimated on the mammogram's cranio-caudal projection. In both premenopausal and postmenopausal subjects, the risk of breast cancer increased progressively with increasing density and percent density area. A significantly increased risk was found also for Wolfe pattern DY in premenopausal women and P2 pattern in postmenopausal subjects. In premenopausal women, mammographically determined breast volume and breast height also were associated positively with breast cancer risk. Although the results of the present study confirmed that mammographic parenchymal patterns and densities were important predictors of breast cancer risk, their practical use in screening seems limited due to the high prevalence of high risk patterns.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 8547541     DOI: 10.1007/bf00052183

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Causes Control        ISSN: 0957-5243            Impact factor:   2.506


  30 in total

1.  Case-control study of factors associated with failure to detect breast cancer by mammography.

Authors:  L Ma; E Fishell; B Wright; W Hanna; S Allan; N F Boyd
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1992-05-20       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 2.  Mammographic parenchymal patterns and breast cancer risk.

Authors:  A F Saftlas; M Szklo
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  1987       Impact factor: 6.222

3.  Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project: five-year summary report.

Authors:  L H Baker
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  1982 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 508.702

4.  Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer.

Authors:  J N Wolfe
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  1976-06       Impact factor: 3.959

5.  Mammographic densities and risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  A F Saftlas; R N Hoover; L A Brinton; M Szklo; D R Olson; M Salane; J N Wolfe
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  1991-06-01       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Diet, mammographic features of breast tissue, and breast cancer risk.

Authors:  J Brisson; R Verreault; A S Morrison; S Tennina; F Meyer
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Mammographic features of the breast and breast cancer risk.

Authors:  J Brisson; F Merletti; N L Sadowsky; J A Twaddle; A S Morrison; P Cole
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1982-03       Impact factor: 4.897

8.  Is breast size a predictor of breast cancer risk or the laterality of the tumor?

Authors:  R T Senie; A F Saftlas; L A Brinton; R N Hoover
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 2.506

9.  Risk factors of breast cancer in Finland.

Authors:  I Soini
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1977-12       Impact factor: 7.196

10.  Are cell number and cell proliferation risk factors for cancer?

Authors:  D Albanes; M Winick
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1988-07-20       Impact factor: 13.506

View more
  46 in total

Review 1.  Mammographic densities as a marker of human breast cancer risk and their use in chemoprevention.

Authors:  N F Boyd; L J Martin; J Stone; C Greenberg; S Minkin; M J Yaffe
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 2.  Breast tissue composition and susceptibility to breast cancer.

Authors:  Norman F Boyd; Lisa J Martin; Michael Bronskill; Martin J Yaffe; Neb Duric; Salomon Minkin
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-07-08       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Mammographic density change with 1 year of aerobic exercise among postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Christy G Woolcott; Kerry S Courneya; Norman F Boyd; Martin J Yaffe; Tim Terry; Anne McTiernan; Rollin Brant; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Melinda L Irwin; Charlotte A Jones; Sony Brar; Kristin L Campbell; Margaret L McNeely; Kristina H Karvinen; Christine M Friedenreich
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Computing mammographic density from a multiple regression model constructed with image-acquisition parameters from a full-field digital mammographic unit.

Authors:  Lee-Jane W Lu; Thomas K Nishino; Tuenchit Khamapirad; James J Grady; Morton H Leonard; Donald G Brunder
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-07-30       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  A breast density index for digital mammograms based on radiologists' ranking.

Authors:  J M Boone; K K Lindfors; C S Beatty; J A Seibert
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 4.056

6.  Mammographic breast density and risk of breast cancer: masking bias or causality?

Authors:  C H van Gils; J D Otten; A L Verbeek; J H Hendriks
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 8.082

7.  Association of Interactions Between Mammographic Density Phenotypes and Established Risk Factors With Breast Cancer Risk, by Tumor Subtype and Menopausal Status.

Authors:  Hongjie Chen; Lusine Yaghjyan; Christopher Li; Ulrike Peters; Bernard Rosner; Sara Lindström; Rulla M Tamimi
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 8.  Mammographic density is not a worthwhile examination to distinguish high cancer risk women in screening.

Authors:  Catherine Colin; Anne-Marie Schott; Pierre-Jean Valette
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-06-28       Impact factor: 5.315

9.  Prenatal smoke exposure and mammographic density in mid-life.

Authors:  M B Terry; C A Schaefer; J D Flom; Y Wei; P Tehranifar; Y Liao; S Buka; K B Michels
Journal:  J Dev Orig Health Dis       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.401

Review 10.  Mammographic density.

Authors:  Norman F Boyd; Lisa J Martin; Martin Yaffe; Salomon Minkin
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2009-12-18       Impact factor: 6.466

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.