Cargando…
Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk
Background: Mammographic density defined by the conventional pixel brightness threshold, and adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI), is a well-established risk factor for breast cancer. We asked if higher thresholds better separate women with and without breast cancer. Methods: We studied Austra...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5837222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28338721 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw212 |
_version_ | 1783304079925051392 |
---|---|
author | Nguyen, Tuong L Aung, Ye K Evans, Christopher F Dite, Gillian S Stone, Jennifer MacInnis, Robert J Dowty, James G Bickerstaffe, Adrian Aujard, Kelly Rommens, Johanna M Song, Yun-Mi Sung, Joohon Jenkins, Mark A Southey, Melissa C Giles, Graham G Apicella, Carmel Hopper, John L |
author_facet | Nguyen, Tuong L Aung, Ye K Evans, Christopher F Dite, Gillian S Stone, Jennifer MacInnis, Robert J Dowty, James G Bickerstaffe, Adrian Aujard, Kelly Rommens, Johanna M Song, Yun-Mi Sung, Joohon Jenkins, Mark A Southey, Melissa C Giles, Graham G Apicella, Carmel Hopper, John L |
author_sort | Nguyen, Tuong L |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background: Mammographic density defined by the conventional pixel brightness threshold, and adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI), is a well-established risk factor for breast cancer. We asked if higher thresholds better separate women with and without breast cancer. Methods: We studied Australian women, 354 with breast cancer over-sampled for early-onset and family history, and 944 unaffected controls frequency-matched for age at mammogram. We measured mammographic dense area and percent density using the CUMULUS software at the conventional threshold, which we call Cumulus, and at two increasingly higher thresholds, which we call Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus, respectively. All measures were Box–Cox transformed and adjusted for age and BMI. We estimated the odds per adjusted standard deviation (OPERA) using logistic regression and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus were correlated with Cumulus (r ∼ 0.8 and 0.6, respectively). For dense area, the OPERA was 1.62, 1.74 and 1.73 for Cumulus, Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus, respectively (all P < 0.001). After adjusting for Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus, Cumulus was not significant (P > 0.6). The OPERAs for percent density were less but gave similar findings. The mean of the standardized adjusted Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus dense area measures was the best predictor; OPERA = 1.87 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.64–2.14] and AUC = 0.68 (0.65–0.71). Conclusions: The areas of higher mammographically dense regions are associated with almost 30% stronger breast cancer risk gradient, explain the risk association of the conventional measure and might be more aetiologically important. This has substantial implications for clinical translation and molecular, genetic and epidemiological research. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5837222 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-58372222018-03-09 Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk Nguyen, Tuong L Aung, Ye K Evans, Christopher F Dite, Gillian S Stone, Jennifer MacInnis, Robert J Dowty, James G Bickerstaffe, Adrian Aujard, Kelly Rommens, Johanna M Song, Yun-Mi Sung, Joohon Jenkins, Mark A Southey, Melissa C Giles, Graham G Apicella, Carmel Hopper, John L Int J Epidemiol Women’s Health Background: Mammographic density defined by the conventional pixel brightness threshold, and adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI), is a well-established risk factor for breast cancer. We asked if higher thresholds better separate women with and without breast cancer. Methods: We studied Australian women, 354 with breast cancer over-sampled for early-onset and family history, and 944 unaffected controls frequency-matched for age at mammogram. We measured mammographic dense area and percent density using the CUMULUS software at the conventional threshold, which we call Cumulus, and at two increasingly higher thresholds, which we call Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus, respectively. All measures were Box–Cox transformed and adjusted for age and BMI. We estimated the odds per adjusted standard deviation (OPERA) using logistic regression and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Results: Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus were correlated with Cumulus (r ∼ 0.8 and 0.6, respectively). For dense area, the OPERA was 1.62, 1.74 and 1.73 for Cumulus, Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus, respectively (all P < 0.001). After adjusting for Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus, Cumulus was not significant (P > 0.6). The OPERAs for percent density were less but gave similar findings. The mean of the standardized adjusted Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus dense area measures was the best predictor; OPERA = 1.87 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.64–2.14] and AUC = 0.68 (0.65–0.71). Conclusions: The areas of higher mammographically dense regions are associated with almost 30% stronger breast cancer risk gradient, explain the risk association of the conventional measure and might be more aetiologically important. This has substantial implications for clinical translation and molecular, genetic and epidemiological research. Oxford University Press 2017-04 2016-10-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5837222/ /pubmed/28338721 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw212 Text en © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Women’s Health Nguyen, Tuong L Aung, Ye K Evans, Christopher F Dite, Gillian S Stone, Jennifer MacInnis, Robert J Dowty, James G Bickerstaffe, Adrian Aujard, Kelly Rommens, Johanna M Song, Yun-Mi Sung, Joohon Jenkins, Mark A Southey, Melissa C Giles, Graham G Apicella, Carmel Hopper, John L Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk |
title | Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk |
title_full | Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk |
title_fullStr | Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk |
title_full_unstemmed | Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk |
title_short | Mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk |
title_sort | mammographic density defined by higher than conventional brightness thresholds better predicts breast cancer risk |
topic | Women’s Health |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5837222/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28338721 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw212 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nguyentuongl mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT aungyek mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT evanschristopherf mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT ditegillians mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT stonejennifer mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT macinnisrobertj mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT dowtyjamesg mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT bickerstaffeadrian mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT aujardkelly mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT rommensjohannam mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT songyunmi mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT sungjoohon mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT jenkinsmarka mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT southeymelissac mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT gilesgrahamg mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT apicellacarmel mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk AT hopperjohnl mammographicdensitydefinedbyhigherthanconventionalbrightnessthresholdsbetterpredictsbreastcancerrisk |