Cargando…

Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers

INTRODUCTION: Mammographic density (MD) is the strongest risk factor for breast cancer. It is also strongly associated with interval cancers (ICs) due to decreased screening sensitivity and possibly by also giving rise to more aggressive tumors. With this information as background, we compared survi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eriksson, Louise, Czene, Kamila, Rosenberg, Lena U, Törnberg, Sven, Humphreys, Keith, Hall, Per
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4053151/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23786804
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/bcr3440
_version_ 1782320331946459136
author Eriksson, Louise
Czene, Kamila
Rosenberg, Lena U
Törnberg, Sven
Humphreys, Keith
Hall, Per
author_facet Eriksson, Louise
Czene, Kamila
Rosenberg, Lena U
Törnberg, Sven
Humphreys, Keith
Hall, Per
author_sort Eriksson, Louise
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Mammographic density (MD) is the strongest risk factor for breast cancer. It is also strongly associated with interval cancers (ICs) due to decreased screening sensitivity and possibly by also giving rise to more aggressive tumors. With this information as background, we compared survival in interval and screen-detected cancers, taking MD into consideration. METHODS: The patients were postmenopausal women ages 50 to 74 years who were diagnosed with breast cancer in Sweden between 1993 and 1995. A total of 1,115 women with screen-detected cancers and 285 with ICs had available mammograms. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare breast cancer-specific survival between interval and screen-detected cancers stratified on MD. RESULTS: Hazard rates for breast cancer-specific survival were approximately three times higher in ICs than in screen-detected cancers, independent of MD. After adjustment for tumor size, a proxy for time to diagnosis, ICs in nondense breasts still had a statistically significantly increased hazard rate compared to screen-detected cancers in nondense breasts (5-yr survival hazard ratio (HR) 2.43, P = 0.001). In dense breasts, however, there was no longer evidence of a difference in survival between ICs and screen-detected cancers (5-yr survival HR 1.41, P = 0.486). CONCLUSIONS: In nondense breasts, ICs seem to be truly more aggressive than screen-detected cancers. In dense breasts, the poorer prognosis of ICs compared to that of screen-detected cancers may be attributable at least partially to later detection. However, to the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to investigate these relationships, and further studies are warranted to confirm our results.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4053151
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40531512014-06-12 Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers Eriksson, Louise Czene, Kamila Rosenberg, Lena U Törnberg, Sven Humphreys, Keith Hall, Per Breast Cancer Res Research Article INTRODUCTION: Mammographic density (MD) is the strongest risk factor for breast cancer. It is also strongly associated with interval cancers (ICs) due to decreased screening sensitivity and possibly by also giving rise to more aggressive tumors. With this information as background, we compared survival in interval and screen-detected cancers, taking MD into consideration. METHODS: The patients were postmenopausal women ages 50 to 74 years who were diagnosed with breast cancer in Sweden between 1993 and 1995. A total of 1,115 women with screen-detected cancers and 285 with ICs had available mammograms. Cox proportional hazards models were used to compare breast cancer-specific survival between interval and screen-detected cancers stratified on MD. RESULTS: Hazard rates for breast cancer-specific survival were approximately three times higher in ICs than in screen-detected cancers, independent of MD. After adjustment for tumor size, a proxy for time to diagnosis, ICs in nondense breasts still had a statistically significantly increased hazard rate compared to screen-detected cancers in nondense breasts (5-yr survival hazard ratio (HR) 2.43, P = 0.001). In dense breasts, however, there was no longer evidence of a difference in survival between ICs and screen-detected cancers (5-yr survival HR 1.41, P = 0.486). CONCLUSIONS: In nondense breasts, ICs seem to be truly more aggressive than screen-detected cancers. In dense breasts, the poorer prognosis of ICs compared to that of screen-detected cancers may be attributable at least partially to later detection. However, to the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to investigate these relationships, and further studies are warranted to confirm our results. BioMed Central 2013 2013-06-20 /pmc/articles/PMC4053151/ /pubmed/23786804 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/bcr3440 Text en Copyright © 2013 Eriksson 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
Eriksson, Louise
Czene, Kamila
Rosenberg, Lena U
Törnberg, Sven
Humphreys, Keith
Hall, Per
Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers
title Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers
title_full Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers
title_fullStr Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers
title_full_unstemmed Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers
title_short Mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers
title_sort mammographic density and survival in interval breast cancers
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4053151/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23786804
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/bcr3440
work_keys_str_mv AT erikssonlouise mammographicdensityandsurvivalinintervalbreastcancers
AT czenekamila mammographicdensityandsurvivalinintervalbreastcancers
AT rosenberglenau mammographicdensityandsurvivalinintervalbreastcancers
AT tornbergsven mammographicdensityandsurvivalinintervalbreastcancers
AT humphreyskeith mammographicdensityandsurvivalinintervalbreastcancers
AT hallper mammographicdensityandsurvivalinintervalbreastcancers