Mammographic density and risk of breast cancer by age and tumor characteristics

Introduction: Understanding whether mammographic density (MD) is associated with all breast tumor subtypes and whether the strength of association varies by age is important for utilizing MD in risk models. Methods: Data were pooled from six studies including 3414 women with breast cancer and 7199 without who underwent screening mammography. Percent MD was assessed from digitized film-screen mammograms using a computer-assisted threshold technique. We used polytomous logistic regression to calculate breast cancer odds according to tumor type, histopathological characteristics, and receptor (estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2)) status by age (51%) versus average density (11-25%). Women ages 2.1 cm) versus small tumors and positive versus negative lymph node status (P’s < 0.01). For women ages <55 years, there was a stronger association of MD with ER-negative breast cancer than ER-positive tumors compared to women ages 55–64 and ≥65 years (Page-interaction = 0.04). MD was positively associated with both HER2-negative and HER2-positive tumors within each age group. Conclusion: MD is strongly associated with all breast cancer subtypes, but particularly tumors of large size and positive lymph nodes across all ages, and ER-negative status among women ages <55 years, suggesting high MD may play an important role in tumor aggressiveness, especially in younger women

Common variants in ZNF365 are associated with both mammographic density and breast cancer risk.

High-percent mammographic density adjusted for age and body mass index is one of the strongest risk factors for breast cancer. We conducted a meta analysis of five genome-wide association studies of percent mammographic density and report an association with rs10995190 in ZNF365 (combined P = 9.6 × 10(-10)). Common variants in ZNF365 have also recently been associated with susceptibility to breast cancer

Postmenopausal mammographic breast density and subsequent breast cancer risk according to selected tissue markers

Background: This study aimed to determine if associations of pre-diagnostic percent breast density, absolute dense area, and non-dense area with subsequent breast cancer risk differ by the tumour's molecular marker status. Methods: We included 1010 postmenopausal women with breast cancer and 2077 matched controls from the Nurses' Health Study (NHS) and the Nurses' Health Study II (NHS II) cohorts. Breast density was estimated from digitised film mammograms using computer-assisted thresholding techniques. Information on breast cancer risk factors was obtained prospectively from biennial questionnaires. Polychotomous logistic regression was used to assess associations of breast density measures with tumour subtypes by the status of selected tissue markers. All tests of statistical significance were two sided. Results: The association of percent density with breast cancer risk appeared to be stronger in ER− as compared with ER+ tumours, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (density ⩾50% vs <10% odds ratio (OR)=3.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.17–4.32 for ER+ OR=4.61, 95% CI 2.36–9.03 for ER−, Pheterogeneity=0.08). Stronger positive associations were found for absolute dense area and CK5/6− and EGFR− as compared with respective marker-positive tumours (Pheterogeneity=0.002 and 0.001, respectively). Stronger inverse associations of non-dense area with breast cancer risk were found for ER− as compared with ER+ tumours (Pheterogeneity=0.0001) and for AR+, CK5/6+, and EGFR+ as compared with respective marker-negative tumours (Pheterogeneity=0.03, 0.005, and 0.009, respectively). The associations of density measures with breast cancer did not differ by progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status. Conclusions: Breast density influences the risk of breast cancer subtypes by potentially different mechanisms