Cargando…

Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer

BACKGROUND: Mammographic density has been shown to be a strong independent predictor of breast cancer and a causative factor in reducing the sensitivity of mammography. There remain questions as to the use of mammographic density information in the context of screening and risk management, and of th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Duffy, Stephen W., Morrish, Oliver W.E., Allgood, Prue C., Black, Richard, Gillan, Maureen G.C., Willsher, Paula, Cooke, Julie, Duncan, Karen A., Michell, Michael J., Dobson, Hilary M., Maroni, Roberta, Lim, Yit Y., Purushothaman, Hema N., Suaris, Tamara, Astley, Susan M., Young, Kenneth C., Tucker, Lorraine, Gilbert, Fiona J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier Science Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5768323/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29190506
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.022
_version_ 1783292682088480768
author Duffy, Stephen W.
Morrish, Oliver W.E.
Allgood, Prue C.
Black, Richard
Gillan, Maureen G.C.
Willsher, Paula
Cooke, Julie
Duncan, Karen A.
Michell, Michael J.
Dobson, Hilary M.
Maroni, Roberta
Lim, Yit Y.
Purushothaman, Hema N.
Suaris, Tamara
Astley, Susan M.
Young, Kenneth C.
Tucker, Lorraine
Gilbert, Fiona J.
author_facet Duffy, Stephen W.
Morrish, Oliver W.E.
Allgood, Prue C.
Black, Richard
Gillan, Maureen G.C.
Willsher, Paula
Cooke, Julie
Duncan, Karen A.
Michell, Michael J.
Dobson, Hilary M.
Maroni, Roberta
Lim, Yit Y.
Purushothaman, Hema N.
Suaris, Tamara
Astley, Susan M.
Young, Kenneth C.
Tucker, Lorraine
Gilbert, Fiona J.
author_sort Duffy, Stephen W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Mammographic density has been shown to be a strong independent predictor of breast cancer and a causative factor in reducing the sensitivity of mammography. There remain questions as to the use of mammographic density information in the context of screening and risk management, and of the association with cancer in populations known to be at increased risk of breast cancer. AIM: To assess the association of breast density with presence of cancer by measuring mammographic density visually as a percentage, and with two automated volumetric methods, Quantra™ and VolparaDensity™. METHODS: The TOMosynthesis with digital MammographY (TOMMY) study of digital breast tomosynthesis in the Breast Screening Programme of the National Health Service (NHS) of the United Kingdom (UK) included 6020 breast screening assessment cases (of whom 1158 had breast cancer) and 1040 screened women with a family history of breast cancer (of whom two had breast cancer). We assessed the association of each measure with breast cancer risk in these populations at enhanced risk, using logistic regression adjusted for age and total breast volume as a surrogate for body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: All density measures showed a positive association with presence of cancer and all declined with age. The strongest effect was seen with Volpara absolute density, with a significant 3% (95% CI 1–5%) increase in risk per 10 cm(3) of dense tissue. The effect of Volpara volumetric density on risk was stronger for large and grade 3 tumours. CONCLUSIONS: Automated absolute breast density is a predictor of breast cancer risk in populations at enhanced risk due to either positive mammographic findings or family history. In the screening context, density could be a trigger for more intensive imaging.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5768323
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Elsevier Science Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-57683232018-01-22 Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer Duffy, Stephen W. Morrish, Oliver W.E. Allgood, Prue C. Black, Richard Gillan, Maureen G.C. Willsher, Paula Cooke, Julie Duncan, Karen A. Michell, Michael J. Dobson, Hilary M. Maroni, Roberta Lim, Yit Y. Purushothaman, Hema N. Suaris, Tamara Astley, Susan M. Young, Kenneth C. Tucker, Lorraine Gilbert, Fiona J. Eur J Cancer Article BACKGROUND: Mammographic density has been shown to be a strong independent predictor of breast cancer and a causative factor in reducing the sensitivity of mammography. There remain questions as to the use of mammographic density information in the context of screening and risk management, and of the association with cancer in populations known to be at increased risk of breast cancer. AIM: To assess the association of breast density with presence of cancer by measuring mammographic density visually as a percentage, and with two automated volumetric methods, Quantra™ and VolparaDensity™. METHODS: The TOMosynthesis with digital MammographY (TOMMY) study of digital breast tomosynthesis in the Breast Screening Programme of the National Health Service (NHS) of the United Kingdom (UK) included 6020 breast screening assessment cases (of whom 1158 had breast cancer) and 1040 screened women with a family history of breast cancer (of whom two had breast cancer). We assessed the association of each measure with breast cancer risk in these populations at enhanced risk, using logistic regression adjusted for age and total breast volume as a surrogate for body mass index (BMI). RESULTS: All density measures showed a positive association with presence of cancer and all declined with age. The strongest effect was seen with Volpara absolute density, with a significant 3% (95% CI 1–5%) increase in risk per 10 cm(3) of dense tissue. The effect of Volpara volumetric density on risk was stronger for large and grade 3 tumours. CONCLUSIONS: Automated absolute breast density is a predictor of breast cancer risk in populations at enhanced risk due to either positive mammographic findings or family history. In the screening context, density could be a trigger for more intensive imaging. Elsevier Science Ltd 2018-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5768323/ /pubmed/29190506 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.022 Text en © 2017 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Duffy, Stephen W.
Morrish, Oliver W.E.
Allgood, Prue C.
Black, Richard
Gillan, Maureen G.C.
Willsher, Paula
Cooke, Julie
Duncan, Karen A.
Michell, Michael J.
Dobson, Hilary M.
Maroni, Roberta
Lim, Yit Y.
Purushothaman, Hema N.
Suaris, Tamara
Astley, Susan M.
Young, Kenneth C.
Tucker, Lorraine
Gilbert, Fiona J.
Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer
title Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer
title_full Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer
title_fullStr Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer
title_full_unstemmed Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer
title_short Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer
title_sort mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5768323/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29190506
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.10.022
work_keys_str_mv AT duffystephenw mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT morrisholiverwe mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT allgoodpruec mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT blackrichard mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT gillanmaureengc mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT willsherpaula mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT cookejulie mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT duncankarena mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT michellmichaelj mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT dobsonhilarym mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT maroniroberta mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT limyity mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT purushothamanheman mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT suaristamara mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT astleysusanm mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT youngkennethc mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT tuckerlorraine mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer
AT gilbertfionaj mammographicdensityandbreastcancerriskinbreastscreeningassessmentcasesandwomenwithafamilyhistoryofbreastcancer