Table 1.

Characteristics of general population studies on mammographic features in relation to breast cancer incidence

First author, y (ref.)Study design. Study population characteristics. Matching variables if applicable (Match). Variables adjusted for in analysis (Adj)No. cases: noncasesAge (y)Mammographic featurePostmammography (y)*
Verbeek, 1984 (32)CC. Cases: diagnosed at 4th screening round in 1981-1982, Nijmegen screening program, the Netherlands; controls: 4 screening rounds. Adj: A, AM, P, AFB, OC, MP, BMI.20:6035-64Wolfe5-6
Brisson, 1988 (2)Cohort of white women in follow-up of BCDDP, United States, 1974-1985. Adj: A.1,999:53,05435-743 grades1-9
de Stavola, 1990 (33)Cohort: Guernsey prospective study, United Kingdom. 1977-1988. Adj: A, FUP, BMI.58:4,89630-75+Wolfe0.5 to ∼7
Ciatto, 1993 (34)Cohort: Florence district population screening, Italy. 1985-1991. Adj: A.126:17,74540-70Wolfe>0 to 5
Boyd, 1995 (10); Byng, 1998 (35); Yaffe, 1998 (36)NCC. Canadian National Breast Screening Study. Match: YR, A, FUP, C. Adj: AM, P, AFB, FH, HT, WT.354:35440-59PD, SK, FD1-5
Byrne, 1995 (27)NCC of all cases diagnosed during screening or follow-up in 22 of 29 BCDDP centers, United States, 1974-1989. Match: A, C, R, YR, no. screens. Adj: AFB, FH, EDUC, ALC, reproductive years, benign biopsy, WT.1,880:2,15235-74Wolfe, PD1-16
Kato, 1995 (37)NCC. New York University Women's Health Study, United States, 1985-1991. Match: A, MP, YR, no. blood samples. Adj: P, BMI, time since menopause.52:195 (pre) 91:178 (post)35-65Wolfe, PD0.5-6
Thurfjell, 1996 (38)NCC. Uppsala county screening program, Sweden. 1988-1993. Match: A. Adj: A, breast size.295:58940-74Wolfe1-5
Salminen, 1998 (39)Cohort of pilot screening program, Kofta, Finland. 1982-1993. Adj: A.68:3,99440-47Wolfe0.5-10
Maskarinec, 2000 (29)NCC. Kaiser Permenente, Hawaii, United States, 1991-1997. Match: YR, A, R. Adj: AM, MP, P, AFB, FH, HRT, previous breast problems.647:647Mean 60PDMean 0.5
van Gils, 2000 (40)NCC. Setting same as for Verbeek 1984, cases diagnosed, 1985-1994. Match: YOB, YR. Adj: P.129:51736-72PD10-11
Thomas, 2002 (30)CC. 4 previous CC studies combined, Seattle, United States, 1983-1995. Match (frequency): A. Adj: A, C.547:472<50Wolfe, PD1 to NK
Ciatto, 2004 (44)NCC of interval cancers. Florence district, Italy. 1996-1999. Match: A, YR. Adj: A. no. breast views, screening round.90:360≥50PD0 to <2
Vacek, 2004 (3)Cohort in Vermont Breast Cancer Surveillance System, United States, 1997-2001. Adj: FH, AFB, HRT, BMI.1,191:60,65335-75+BIRADS1 to ∼3.1
Ziv, 2004 (41)Cohort of women who had mammography between 1995-2002 at San Francisco Mammography Registry. Adj: A, BMI, HRT, FH, MP, P, R.701:44,110Mean 58 in casesBIRADS0-7.5
Maskarinec, 2005 (42)NCC. Multiethnic cohort study, Hawaii, United States, 1993-2000. Match (frequency): A, R. Adj: R, A, BMI, AFB, P, AM, age at menopause, HRT, FH.607:667Mean 60PD0-7
Torres-Mejia, 2005 (43)Cohort: Guernsey prospective study, United Kingdom. 1986-2003. Adj: A, EDUC, SEC, job, P, HT, BMI, recent change in BMI.111:3,10035-80Wolfe, PD, FD, SK0-17
  • Abbreviations: CC, case-control; NCC, nested case-control study; A, age; AFB, age at first birth; ALC, alcohol consumption; AM, age at menarche; C, center/clinic; EDUC, education; FH, family history of breast cancer; FUP, follow-up time; HRT, current hormone replacement therapy use; HT, height; MP, menopausal status; OC, history of oral contraceptive use; P, parity; R, race/ethnicity; SEC, socioeconomic status; WT, weight; YR, year; PD, percentage density; SK, skewness; FD, fractal dimension; BCDDP, Breast Cancer Detection and Demonstration Project.

  • * Time from density assessment to cancer diagnosis in cases.