Cargando…

Mammographic density and markers of socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status (SES) is known to be positively associated with breast cancer risk but its relationship with mammographic density, a marker of susceptibility to breast cancer, is unclear. This study aims to investigate whether mammographic density varies by SES and to identify the u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aitken, Zoe, Walker, Kate, Stegeman, Bernardine H, Wark, Petra A, Moss, Sue M, McCormack, Valerie A, dos Santos Silva, Isabel
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2829497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20144221
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-10-35
_version_ 1782178097019224064
author Aitken, Zoe
Walker, Kate
Stegeman, Bernardine H
Wark, Petra A
Moss, Sue M
McCormack, Valerie A
dos Santos Silva, Isabel
author_facet Aitken, Zoe
Walker, Kate
Stegeman, Bernardine H
Wark, Petra A
Moss, Sue M
McCormack, Valerie A
dos Santos Silva, Isabel
author_sort Aitken, Zoe
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status (SES) is known to be positively associated with breast cancer risk but its relationship with mammographic density, a marker of susceptibility to breast cancer, is unclear. This study aims to investigate whether mammographic density varies by SES and to identify the underlying anthropometric, lifestyle and reproductive factors leading to such variation. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study of mammographic density in 487 pre-menopausal women, SES was assessed from questionnaire data using highest achieved level of formal education, quintiles of Census-derived Townsend scores and urban/rural classification of place of residence. Mammographic density was measured on digitised films using a computer-assisted method. Linear regression models were fitted to assess the association between SES variables and mammographic density, adjusting for correlated variables. RESULTS: In unadjusted models, percent density was positively associated with SES, with an absolute difference in percent density of 6.3% (95% CI 1.6%, 10.5%) between highest and lowest educational categories, and of 6.6% (95% CI -0.7%, 12.9%) between highest and lowest Townsend quintiles. These associations were mainly driven by strong negative associations between these SES variables and lucent area and were attenuated upon adjustment for body mass index (BMI). There was little evidence that reproductive factors explained this association. SES was not associated with the amount of dense tissue in the breast before or after BMI adjustment. The effect of education on percent density persisted after adjustment for Townsend score. Mammographic measures did not vary according to urban/rural place of residence. CONCLUSIONS: The observed SES gradients in percent density paralleled known SES gradients in breast cancer risk. Although consistent with the hypothesis that percent density may be a mediator of the SES differentials in breast cancer risk, the SES gradients in percent density were mainly driven by the negative association between SES and BMI. Nevertheless, as density affects the sensitivity of screen-film mammography, the higher percent density found among high SES women would imply that these women have a higher risk of developing cancer but a lower likelihood of having it detected earlier.
format Text
id pubmed-2829497
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28294972010-02-28 Mammographic density and markers of socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study Aitken, Zoe Walker, Kate Stegeman, Bernardine H Wark, Petra A Moss, Sue M McCormack, Valerie A dos Santos Silva, Isabel BMC Cancer Research Article BACKGROUND: Socioeconomic status (SES) is known to be positively associated with breast cancer risk but its relationship with mammographic density, a marker of susceptibility to breast cancer, is unclear. This study aims to investigate whether mammographic density varies by SES and to identify the underlying anthropometric, lifestyle and reproductive factors leading to such variation. METHODS: In a cross-sectional study of mammographic density in 487 pre-menopausal women, SES was assessed from questionnaire data using highest achieved level of formal education, quintiles of Census-derived Townsend scores and urban/rural classification of place of residence. Mammographic density was measured on digitised films using a computer-assisted method. Linear regression models were fitted to assess the association between SES variables and mammographic density, adjusting for correlated variables. RESULTS: In unadjusted models, percent density was positively associated with SES, with an absolute difference in percent density of 6.3% (95% CI 1.6%, 10.5%) between highest and lowest educational categories, and of 6.6% (95% CI -0.7%, 12.9%) between highest and lowest Townsend quintiles. These associations were mainly driven by strong negative associations between these SES variables and lucent area and were attenuated upon adjustment for body mass index (BMI). There was little evidence that reproductive factors explained this association. SES was not associated with the amount of dense tissue in the breast before or after BMI adjustment. The effect of education on percent density persisted after adjustment for Townsend score. Mammographic measures did not vary according to urban/rural place of residence. CONCLUSIONS: The observed SES gradients in percent density paralleled known SES gradients in breast cancer risk. Although consistent with the hypothesis that percent density may be a mediator of the SES differentials in breast cancer risk, the SES gradients in percent density were mainly driven by the negative association between SES and BMI. Nevertheless, as density affects the sensitivity of screen-film mammography, the higher percent density found among high SES women would imply that these women have a higher risk of developing cancer but a lower likelihood of having it detected earlier. BioMed Central 2010-02-09 /pmc/articles/PMC2829497/ /pubmed/20144221 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-10-35 Text en Copyright ©2010 Aitken et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Aitken, Zoe
Walker, Kate
Stegeman, Bernardine H
Wark, Petra A
Moss, Sue M
McCormack, Valerie A
dos Santos Silva, Isabel
Mammographic density and markers of socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study
title Mammographic density and markers of socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study
title_full Mammographic density and markers of socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study
title_fullStr Mammographic density and markers of socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study
title_full_unstemmed Mammographic density and markers of socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study
title_short Mammographic density and markers of socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study
title_sort mammographic density and markers of socioeconomic status: a cross-sectional study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2829497/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20144221
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-10-35
work_keys_str_mv AT aitkenzoe mammographicdensityandmarkersofsocioeconomicstatusacrosssectionalstudy
AT walkerkate mammographicdensityandmarkersofsocioeconomicstatusacrosssectionalstudy
AT stegemanbernardineh mammographicdensityandmarkersofsocioeconomicstatusacrosssectionalstudy
AT warkpetraa mammographicdensityandmarkersofsocioeconomicstatusacrosssectionalstudy
AT mosssuem mammographicdensityandmarkersofsocioeconomicstatusacrosssectionalstudy
AT mccormackvaleriea mammographicdensityandmarkersofsocioeconomicstatusacrosssectionalstudy
AT dossantossilvaisabel mammographicdensityandmarkersofsocioeconomicstatusacrosssectionalstudy