Literature DB >> 9106643

Genetic analysis of mammographic breast density in adult women: evidence of a gene effect.

J S Pankow1, C M Vachon, C C Kuni, R A King, D K Arnett, D M Grabrick, S S Rich, V E Anderson, T A Sellers.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The appearance of the female breast viewed by mammography varies considerably from one individual to another because of underlying differences in the relative proportions of fat, connective tissue, and glandular epithelium that combine to create a characteristic pattern of breast density. An association between mammographic patterns and family history of breast cancer has previously been reported. However, this association has not been found in all studies, and few data are available on possible genetic components contributing to mammographic breast density.
PURPOSE: Our purpose was to estimate familial correlations and perform complex genetic segregation analyses to test the hypothesis that the transmission of a major gene influences mammographic breast density.
METHODS: As part of a cohort study (initiated in 1944) of families with a history of breast cancer, the probands' female relatives who were older than 40 years were asked to obtain a routine mammogram. The mammograms of 1370 women from 258 independent families were analyzed. The fraction of the breast volume occupied by radiographically dense tissue was estimated visually from video displays of left or right mediolateral oblique views by one radiologist experienced in mammography who had no knowledge of individual relationships to the probands. Data on breast cancer risk factors were obtained through telephone interviews and mailed questionnaires. Unadjusted and adjusted familial correlations in breast density were calculated, and complex genetic segregation analyses were performed.
RESULTS: Sister-sister correlations in breast density (unadjusted and adjusted for age and either body mass index, menopausal status, hormone replacement therapy, waist-to-hip ratio, number of live births, alcohol consumption, or cigarette smoking status) were all statistically significant (r = .16-.27; all P<.05 [two-sided]). Estimated mother-daughter correlations were smaller in magnitude (r = .01-.17) and not statistically significant. Segregation analyses indicate that a major autosomal gene influences breast density. The mendelian transmission of a dominant gene provided the best fit to the data; however, hypotheses involving the inheritance of either a recessive gene or a codominant gene could not be ruled out. The mendelian dominant hypothesis, accounting for 29% of the variability in breast density, suggests that approximately 12% of the population would be expected to carry at least one variant allele of this putative gene. Women who inherit the variant allele would have a mean breast density about twice that of the rest of the population.
CONCLUSIONS: Our preliminary findings suggest that, in this cohort of women at risk of breast cancer, mammographic breast density may be genetically influenced.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9106643     DOI: 10.1093/jnci/89.8.549

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst        ISSN: 0027-8874            Impact factor:   13.506


  28 in total

Review 1.  Clinical and epidemiological issues in mammographic density.

Authors:  Valentina Assi; Jane Warwick; Jack Cuzick; Stephen W Duffy
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 66.675

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.  Correlation is not causation.

Authors:  B K Rimer
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 9.308

4.  Mammographic density does not differ between unaffected BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and women at low-to-average risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  Gretchen L Gierach; Jennifer T Loud; Catherine K Chow; Sheila A Prindiville; Jennifer Eng-Wong; Peter W Soballe; Claudia Giambartolomei; Phuong L Mai; Claudia E Galbo; Kathryn Nichols; Kathleen A Calzone; Celine Vachon; Mitchell H Gail; Mark H Greene
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2010-02-04       Impact factor: 4.872

Review 5.  Postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy: effects on normal mammary gland in humans and in a mouse postmenopausal model.

Authors:  Sandra Z Haslam; Janet R Osuch; A M Raafat; L J Hofseth
Journal:  J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.673

6.  Genetic variation in transforming growth factor beta 1 and mammographic density in Singapore Chinese women.

Authors:  Eunjung Lee; David Van Den Berg; Chris Hsu; Giske Ursin; Woon-Puay Koh; Jian-Min Yuan; Daniel O Stram; Mimi C Yu; Anna H Wu
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 12.701

Review 7.  Breast Cancer Prevention: Current Approaches and Future Directions.

Authors:  Edward R Sauter
Journal:  Eur J Breast Health       Date:  2018-04-01

8.  Prior breast density awareness, knowledge, and communication in a health system-embedded behavioral intervention trial.

Authors:  Siobhan S Mahorter; Sarah Knerr; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Karen J Wernli; Hongyuan Gao; Marc D Schwartz; Suzanne C O'Neill
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2020-01-24       Impact factor: 6.860

Review 9.  Can genes for mammographic density inform cancer aetiology?

Authors:  Linda E Kelemen; Thomas A Sellers; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  Nat Rev Cancer       Date:  2008-09-05       Impact factor: 60.716

10.  Mammographic breast density--evidence for genetic correlations with established breast cancer risk factors.

Authors:  Julie A Douglas; Marie-Hélène Roy-Gagnon; Chuan Zhou; Braxton D Mitchell; Alan R Shuldiner; Heang-Ping Chan; Mark A Helvie
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11-24       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.