CEBP http://www.cancermicroenvironment.tau.ac.il/welcome2009.html Frontiers in Basic Cancer Research
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, D. B.
Right arrow Articles by Davis, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, D. B.
Right arrow Articles by Davis, S.
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Vol. 11, 565-571, June 2002
© 2002 American Association for Cancer Research

Risk of Subsequent Breast Cancer in Relation to Characteristics of Screening Mammograms from Women Less Than 50 Years of Age1

David B. Thomas2, Rachel A. Carter, William H. Bush, Jr., Roberta M. Ray, Janet L. Stanford, Constance D. Lehman, Janet R. Daling, Kathi Malone and Scott Davis

Program in Epidemiology [D. B. T., R. M. R., J. L. S., J. R. D., K. M., S. D.], Clinical Research Division [R. A. C.], The Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, Washington 98109-1024, and Department of Radiology, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington 98195 [W. H. B., C. D. L.]

This investigation was conducted to assess the predictive valueof calcifications and densities in mammograms from women <50 years of age for subsequent diagnosis of breast cancer. In a population-based study, prior screening mammograms taken before age 50 in 547 women with breast cancer and 472 controls were reviewed by a single radiologist. The relative risk (RR) of subsequent breast cancer increased with the percentage of the area of the mammogram that was mammographically dense [RR in succeeding quartiles of density = 1.0, 1.7 (1.1–2.6), 3.3 (2.2–5.0), and 4.0 (2.7–6.0)]; in relation to Wolfe parenchymal pattern class P2 [RR = 3.1 (2.2–4.3)] or DY [RR = 5.6 (3.2–10.0)]; and in relation to calcifications of class 1 (pleomorphic of any distribution) or class 2 (various morphological types that are regional, grouped, clustered, segmental, or linear in distribution) [RR = 3.0 (1.4–7.1), and 1.8 (1.2–2.6), respectively]. Women with radiographically dense mammograms and class 1 or 2 calcifications were at >10- and ~6-fold greater risk, respectively, than women with breasts of low density and no calcifications. Densities and parenchymal patterns were most strongly associated with breast cancer being diagnosed in the next 3 years. Class 1 and 2 calcifications were most strongly predictive of an increased risk in 3–6 years. Class 1 calcifications were strongly predictive of the breast in which the subsequent cancer occurred. Women <50 years of age with class 1 or 2 calcifications or mammographically dense breasts, or both, should receive high priority for further evaluation and regular breast cancer screening.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
P. R. Bakic, A.-K. Carton, D. Kontos, C. Zhang, A. B. Troxel, and A. D. A. Maidment
Breast Percent Density: Estimation on Digital Mammograms and Central Tomosynthesis Projections
Radiology, July 1, 2009; 252(1): 40 - 49.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
H. F. Boehm, T. Schneider, S. M. Buhmann-Kirchhoff, T. Schlossbauer, D. Rjosk-Dendorfer, S. Britsch, and M. Reiser
Automated Classification of Breast Parenchymal Density: Topologic Analysis of X-Ray Attenuation Patterns Depicted with Digital Mammography
Am. J. Roentgenol., December 1, 2008; 191(6): W275 - W282.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
J. Ding, R. Warren, I. Warsi, N. Day, D. Thompson, M. Brady, C. Tromans, R. Highnam, and D. Easton
Evaluating the Effectiveness of Using Standard Mammogram Form to Predict Breast Cancer Risk: Case-Control Study
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2008; 17(5): 1074 - 1081.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Endocr Relat CancerHome page
R. J Santen, N. F Boyd, R. T Chlebowski, S. Cummings, J. Cuzick, M. Dowsett, D. Easton, J. F Forbes, T. Key, S. E Hankinson, et al.
Critical assessment of new risk factors for breast cancer: considerations for development of an improved risk prediction model
Endocr. Relat. Cancer, June 1, 2007; 14(2): 169 - 187.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
Y. Cui and T. E. Rohan
Vitamin d, calcium, and breast cancer risk: a review.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., August 1, 2006; 15(8): 1427 - 1437.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
M. R. Palomares, J. R.B. Machia, C. D. Lehman, J. R. Daling, and A. McTiernan
Mammographic density correlation with gail model breast cancer risk estimates and component risk factors.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2006; 15(7): 1324 - 1330.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
V. A. McCormack and I. dos Santos Silva
Breast Density and Parenchymal Patterns as Markers of Breast Cancer Risk: A Meta-analysis.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., June 1, 2006; 15(6): 1159 - 1169.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
S. Berube, C. Diorio, B. Masse, N. Hebert-Croteau, C. Byrne, G. Cote, M. Pollak, M. Yaffe, and J. Brisson
Vitamin D and Calcium Intakes from Food or Supplements and Mammographic Breast Density
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2005; 14(7): 1653 - 1659.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
G. Torres-Mejia, B. De Stavola, D. S. Allen, J. J. Perez-Gavilan, J. M. Ferreira, I. S. Fentiman, and I. dos Santos Silva
Mammographic Features and Subsequent Risk of Breast Cancer: A Comparison of Qualitative and Quantitative Evaluations in the Guernsey Prospective Studies
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., May 1, 2005; 14(5): 1052 - 1059.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
S. Berube, C. Diorio, W. Verhoek-Oftedahl, and J. Brisson
Vitamin D, Calcium, and Mammographic Breast Densities
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., September 1, 2004; 13(9): 1466 - 1472.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
J. Brisson, C. Diorio, and B. Masse
Wolfe's Parenchymal Pattern and Percentage of the Breast with Mammographic Densities: Redundant or Complementary Classifications?
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., August 1, 2003; 12(8): 728 - 732.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 2002 by the American Association for Cancer Research.