Celine M. Vachon

Association of mammographically defined percent breast density with epidemiologic risk factors for breast cancer (United States)

AbstractObjective: Mammographically defined percent breast density is an important risk factor for breast cancer, but the epidemiology of this trait is poorly understood. Although several studies have investigated the associations between reproductive factors and density, few data are available on the associations of breast density and waist-to-hip ratio (WHR), physical activity, education, alcohol and smoking. Methods: We investigated the associations of known and suspected breast cancer risk factors with breast density in a large breast cancer family study. Information was collected on members of 426 families through telephone interviews, mailed questionnaires and mammography. Mammographic films on 1900 women were digitized and breast density was estimated in discrete five-unit increments by one radiologist. Analysis of covariance techniques were used and all analyses were performed stratified by menopausal status. Results: Similar to other reports, nulliparity, late age at first birth, younger age and lower body mass index were associated with increased percent density in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women, and hormone replacement therapy among postmenopausal women. Higher levels of alcohol consumption and low WHR were associated with increased percent density among both premenopausal and postmenopausal women (differences of 3–11% between high and low categories). However, smoking and education were inversely associated with percent density among premenopausal (p = 0.004 and p = 0.003, respectively) but not postmenopausal women (p = 0.52 and p = 0.90). Physical activity was not associated with percent density in either stratum (p values > 0.25). Combined, these factors explained approximately 37% of the variability in the percent density measure in premenopausal women and 19% in postmenopausal women. Conclusions: Many of these factors may potentially affect breast cancer risk through their effect on percent breast density.

Malignant Melanoma in the 21st Century, Part 1: Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Screening, Prevention, and Diagnosis

Malignant melanoma is an aggressive, therapy-resistant malignancy of melanocytes. The incidence of melanoma has been steadily increasing worldwide, resulting in an increasing public health problem. Exposure to solar UV radiation, fair skin, dysplastic nevi syndrome, and a family history of melanoma are major risk factors for melanoma development. The interactions between genetic and environmental risk factors that promote melanomagenesis are currently the subject of ongoing research. Avoidance of UV radiation and surveillance of high-risk patients have the potential to reduce the population burden of melanoma. Biopsies of the primary tumor and sampling of draining lymph nodes are required for optimal diagnosis and staging. Several clinically relevant pathologic subtypes have been identified and need to be recognized. Therapy for early disease is predominantly surgical, with a minor benefit noted with the use of adjuvant therapy. Management of systemic melanoma is a challenge because of a paucity of active treatment modalities. In the first part of this 2-part review, we discuss epidemiology, risk factors, screening, prevention, and diagnosis of malignant melanoma. Part 2 (which will appear in the April 2007 issue) will review melanoma staging, prognosis, and treatment.

Inherited Mutations in 17 Breast Cancer Susceptibility Genes Among a Large Triple-Negative Breast Cancer Cohort Unselected for Family History of Breast Cancer

PURPOSE Recent advances in DNA sequencing have led to the development of breast cancer susceptibility gene panels for germline genetic testing of patients. We assessed the frequency of mutations in 17 predisposition genes, including BRCA1 and BRCA2, in a large cohort of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) unselected for family history of breast or ovarian cancer to determine the utility of germline genetic testing for those with TNBC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with TNBC (N = 1,824) unselected for family history of breast or ovarian cancer were recruited through 12 studies, and germline DNA was sequenced to identify mutations. RESULTS Deleterious mutations were identified in 14.6% of all patients. Of these, 11.2% had mutations in the BRCA1 (8.5%) and BRCA2 (2.7%) genes. Deleterious mutations in 15 other predisposition genes were detected in 3.7% of patients, with the majority observed in genes involved in homologous recombination, including PALB2 (1.2%) and BARD1, RAD51D, RAD51C, and BRIP1 (0.3% to 0.5%). Patients with TNBC with mutations were diagnosed at an earlier age (P < .001) and had higher-grade tumors (P = .01) than those without mutations. CONCLUSION Deleterious mutations in predisposition genes are present at high frequency in patients with TNBC unselected for family history of cancer. Mutation prevalence estimates suggest that patients with TNBC, regardless of age at diagnosis or family history of cancer, should be considered for germline genetic testing of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Although mutations in other predisposition genes are observed among patients with TNBC, better cancer risk estimates are needed before these mutations are used for clinical risk assessment in relatives.

Mammographic density, breast cancer risk and risk prediction

In this review, we examine the evidence for mammographic density as an independent risk factor for breast cancer, describe the risk prediction models that have incorporated density, and discuss the current and future implications of using mammographic density in clinical practice. Mammographic density is a consistent and strong risk factor for breast cancer in several populations and across age at mammogram. Recently, this risk factor has been added to existing breast cancer risk prediction models, increasing the discriminatory accuracy with its inclusion, albeit slightly. With validation, these models may replace the existing Gail model for clinical risk assessment. However, absolute risk estimates resulting from these improved models are still limited in their ability to characterize an individuals probability of developing cancer. Promising new measures of mammographic density, including volumetric density, which can be standardized using full-field digital mammography, will likely result in a stronger risk factor and improve accuracy of risk prediction models.

Dietary folate intake, alcohol, and risk of breast cancer in a prospective study of postmenopausal women.

Low B-vitamin intake may increase risk of breast cancer through decreased DNA repair capacity. Alcohol intake increases risk for breast cancer, with evidence from prospective studies of an interaction between alcohol and folate. We explored dietary intake of folate and other B vitamins with risk of breast cancer in a cohort study of 34,387 postmenopausal women. To measure diet, we mailed a food frequency questionnaire; we estimated nutrient intakes and categorized them into four levels: <10th, 11th–30th, 31st–50th, and >50th percentiles. Through 12 years of follow-up, we identified 1,586 cases of breast cancer in the cohort at risk. We estimated relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) through Cox regression models adjusted for age, energy, and other risk factors. Women in the lowest 10th percentile of folate intake from diet alone were at modestly increased risk of breast cancer relative to those above the 50th percentile: RR = 1.21 (95% CI = 0.91–1.61). We examined the joint association of folate intake and alcohol use on risk of breast cancer, with the reference group defined as women with high folate (>50th percentile) and no alcohol use. The RRs of breast cancer associated with low dietary folate intake were 1.08 (95% CI = 0.78–1.49) among nondrinkers, 1.33 (95% CI = 0.86–2.05) among drinkers of ≤4 gm per day, and 1.59 (95% CI = 1.05–2.41) among drinkers of >4 gm per day. These results suggest that the risks of postmenopausal breast cancer may be increased among women with low intakes of folate if they consume alcohol-containing beverages.

Prevention of Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women: Approaches to Estimating and Reducing Risk

BACKGROUND It is uncertain whether evidence supports routinely estimating a postmenopausal womans risk of breast cancer and intervening to reduce risk. METHODS We systematically reviewed prospective studies about models and sex hormone levels to assess breast cancer risk and used meta-analysis with random effects models to summarize the predictive accuracy of breast density. We also reviewed prospective studies of the effects of exercise, weight management, healthy diet, moderate alcohol consumption, and fruit and vegetable intake on breast cancer risk, and used random effects models for a meta-analyses of tamoxifen and raloxifene for primary prevention of breast cancer. All studies reviewed were published before June 2008, and all statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS Risk models that are based on demographic characteristics and medical history had modest discriminatory accuracy for estimating breast cancer risk (c-statistics range = 0.58-0.63). Breast density was strongly associated with breast cancer (relative risk [RR] = 4.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.10 to 5.26, for Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category IV vs category I; RR = 4.20, 95% CI = 3.61 to 4.89, for >75% vs <5% of dense area), and adding breast density to models improved discriminatory accuracy (c-statistics range = 0.63-0.66). Estradiol was also associated with breast cancer (RR range = 2.0-2.9, comparing the highest vs lowest quintile of estradiol, P < .01). Most studies found that exercise, weight reduction, low-fat diet, and reduced alcohol intake were associated with a decreased risk of breast cancer. Tamoxifen and raloxifene reduced the risk of estrogen receptor-positive invasive breast cancer and invasive breast cancer overall. CONCLUSIONS Evidence from this study supports screening for breast cancer risk in all postmenopausal women by use of risk factors and breast density and considering chemoprevention for those found to be at high risk. Several lifestyle changes with the potential to prevent breast cancer should be recommended regardless of risk.

Mammographic Breast Density as a General Marker of Breast Cancer Risk

Mammographic breast density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer but whether breast density is a general marker of susceptibility or is specific to the location of the eventual cancer is unknown. A study of 372 incident breast cancer cases and 713 matched controls was conducted within the Mayo Clinic mammography screening practice. Mammograms on average 7 years before breast cancer were digitized, and quantitative measures of percentage density and dense area from each side and view were estimated. A regional density estimate accounting for overall percentage density was calculated from both mammogram views. Location of breast cancer and potential confounders were abstracted from medical records. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate associations, and C-statistics were used to evaluate the strength of risk prediction. There were increasing trends in breast cancer risk with increasing quartiles of percentage density and dense area, irrespective of the side of the breast with cancer (Ptrends < 0.001). Percentage density from the ipsilateral side [craniocaudal (CC): odds ratios (ORs), 1.0 (ref), 1.7, 3.1, and 3.1; mediolateral oblique (MLO): ORs, 1.0 (ref), 1.5, 2.2, and 2.8] and the contralateral side [CC: ORs, 1.0 (ref), 1.8, 2.2, and 3.7; MLO: ORs, 1.0 (ref), 1.6, 1.9, and 2.5] similarly predicted case-control status (C-statistics, 0.64-65). Accounting for overall percentage density, density in the region where the cancer subsequently developed was not a significant risk factor [CC: 1.0 (ref), 1.3, 1.0, and 1.2; MLO: 1.0 (ref), 1.1, 1.0, and 1.1 for increasing quartiles]. Results did not change when examining mammograms 3 years on average before the cancer. Overall mammographic density seems to represent a general marker of breast cancer risk that is not specific to breast side or location of the eventual cancer. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16(1):43–9)

Breast Cancer Risk by Breast Density, Menopause, and Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy Use

PURPOSE We determined whether the association between breast density and breast cancer risk and cancer severity differs according to menopausal status and postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) use. METHODS We collected data on 587,369 women who underwent 1,349,027 screening mammography examinations; 14,090 women were diagnosed with breast cancer. We calculated 5-year breast cancer risk from a survival model for subgroups of women classified by their Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) breast density, age, menopausal status, and current HT use, assuming a body mass index of 25 kg/m(2). Odds of advanced (ie, IIb, III, IV) versus early (ie, I, IIa) stage invasive cancer was calculated according to BIRADS density. RESULTS Breast cancer risk was low among women with low density (BIRADS-1): women age 55 to 59 years, 5-year risk was 0.8% (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9%) for non-HT users and 0.9% (95% CI, 0.7% to 1.1%) for estrogen and estrogen plus progestin users. Breast cancer risk was high among women with very high density (BIRADS-4), particularly estrogen plus progestin users: women age 55 to 59 years, 5-year risk was 2.4% (95% CI, 2.0% to 2.8%) for non-HT users, 3.0% (95% CI, 2.6% to 3.5%) for estrogen users, and 4.2% (95% CI, 3.7% to 4.6%) for estrogen plus progestin users. Advanced-stage breast cancer risk was increased 1.7-fold for postmenopausal HT users who had very high density (BIRADS-4) compared to those with average density (BIRADS-2). CONCLUSION Postmenopausal women with high breast density are at increased risk of breast cancer and should be aware of the added risk of taking HT, especially estrogen plus progestin.

Lung Cancer Risk Reduction After Smoking Cessation: Observations From a Prospective Cohort of Women

PURPOSE We conducted this study because the duration of excess lung cancer risk among former smokers has been inconsistently reported, doubt has been raised regarding the population impact of smoking cessation, and differential risk reduction by histologic cell type after smoking cessation needs to be confirmed. METHODS The Iowa Womens Health Study is a prospective cohort study of 41,836 Iowa women aged 55 to 69 years. In 1986, mailed questionnaires were used to collect detailed smoking history. Age-adjusted lung cancer incidence through 1999 was analyzed according to years of smoking abstinence. Relative risks were estimated using Cox regression analysis. RESULTS There were 37,078 women in the analytic cohort. Compared with the never smokers, former smokers had an elevated lung cancer risk (relative risk, 6.6; 95% confidence interval, 5.0 to 8.7) up to 30 years after smoking cessation for all former smokers. However, a beneficial effect of smoking cessation was observed among recent and distant former smokers. The risk of adenocarcinoma remained elevated up to 30 years for both former heavier and former lighter smokers. CONCLUSION The risk for lung cancer is increased for both current and former smokers compared with never smokers and declines for former smokers with increasing duration of abstinence. The decline in excess lung cancer risk among former smokers is prolonged compared with other studies, especially for adenocarcinoma and for heavy smokers, suggesting that more emphasis should be placed on smoking prevention and lung cancer chemoprevention.

Genome-wide association study of follicular lymphoma identifies a risk locus at 6p21.32

To identify susceptibility loci for non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtypes, we conducted a three-stage genome-wide association study. We identified two variants associated with follicular lymphoma at 6p21.32 (rs10484561, combined P = 1.12 × 10−29 and rs7755224, combined P = 2.00 × 10−19; r2 = 1.0), supporting the idea that major histocompatibility complex genetic variation influences follicular lymphoma susceptibility. We also found confirmatory evidence of a previously reported association between chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma and rs735665 (combined P = 4.24 × 10−9).