105
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    13
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Mammographic Density and the Risk and Detection of Breast Cancer

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Extensive mammographic density is associated with an increased risk of breast cancer and makes the detection of cancer by mammography difficult, but the influence of density on risk according to method of cancer detection is unknown. We carried out three nested case-control studies in screened populations with 1112 matched case-control pairs. We examined the association of the measured percentage of density in the baseline mammogram with risk of breast cancer, according to method of cancer detection, time since the initiation of screening, and age. As compared with women with density in less than 10% of the mammogram, women with density in 75% or more had an increased risk of breast cancer (odds ratio, 4.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0 to 7.4), whether detected by screening (odds ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 2.0 to 6.2) or less than 12 months after a negative screening examination (odds ratio, 17.8; 95% CI, 4.8 to 65.9). Increased risk of breast cancer, whether detected by screening or other means, persisted for at least 8 years after study entry and was greater in younger than in older women. For women younger than the median age of 56 years, 26% of all breast cancers and 50% of cancers detected less than 12 months after a negative screening test were attributable to density in 50% or more of the mammogram. Extensive mammographic density is strongly associated with the risk of breast cancer detected by screening or between screening tests. A substantial fraction of breast cancers can be attributed to this risk factor. Copyright 2007 Massachusetts Medical Society.

          Related collections

          Most cited references19

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers.

          Screening mammography is the best method to reduce mortality from breast cancer, yet some breast cancers cannot be detected by mammography. Cancers diagnosed after a negative mammogram are known as interval cancers. This study investigated whether mammographic breast density is related to the risk of interval cancer. Subjects were selected from women participating in mammographic screening from 1988 through 1993 in a large health maintenance organization based in Seattle, WA. Women were eligible for the study if they had been diagnosed with a first primary invasive breast cancer within 24 months of a screening mammogram and before a subsequent one. Interval cancer case subjects (n = 149) were women whose breast cancer occurred after a negative or benign mammographic assessment. Screen-detected control subjects (n = 388) were diagnosed after a positive screening mammogram. One radiologist, who was blinded to cancer status, assessed breast density by use of the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Mammographic sensitivity (i.e., the ability of mammography to detect a cancer) was 80% among women with predominantly fatty breasts but just 30% in women with extremely dense breasts. The odds ratio (OR) for interval cancer among women with extremely dense breasts was 6.14 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.95-19.4), compared with women with extremely fatty breasts, after adjustment for age at index mammogram, menopausal status, use of hormone replacement therapy, and body mass index. When only those interval cancer cases confirmed by retrospective review of index mammograms were considered, the OR increased to 9.47 (95% CI = 2.78-32.3). Mammographic breast density appears to be a major risk factor for interval cancer.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer.

            The radiographic appearance of the breast parenchyma provides a method of predicting who will develop a breast cancer. This paper describes a restrospective study of 7,214 patients. On the basis of the radiographic appearance of the breast parenchyma, patients were placed into one of four groups of risk for developing carcinoma of the breast. Follow-up studies revealed a stepwise progression in the incidence of developing carcinoma of the breast at least 6 months after the radiographic examination. In one of the two substudies, there was a 37 times greater incidence for those at highest risk compared to the low risk group. The classifications presented are thought to be of value in the everyday practice of mammography as well as in planning screening programs.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Risk for breast cancer development determined by mammographic parenchymal pattern.

              A classification of risk for developing breast cancer has been devised based solely on the appearance of the breast parenchyma by mammography. Four groups of patients were isolated. The study encompassed a five-year period and was done by reviewing the mammograms of all women over the age of 30 who had been examined at Hutzel Hospital, Detroit. The average time of followup would be approximately 2 1/2 years. Four groups had an incidence of developing breast cancer of 0.1, 0.4, 1.7, and 2.2. These parenchymal patterns are described and criteria for their identification are given.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                New England Journal of Medicine
                N Engl J Med
                Massachusetts Medical Society
                0028-4793
                1533-4406
                January 18 2007
                January 18 2007
                : 356
                : 3
                : 227-236
                Article
                10.1056/NEJMoa062790
                17229950
                07a2a51d-f1b4-4961-9d81-f7c7cbe11b4b
                © 2007
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article