Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Progress and Priorities
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Informing Public Health Policy
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CEBP Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Progress and Priorities
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Disparities Collection
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Informing Public Health Policy
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

Research Articles

The Insulin-Like Growth Factor System and Mammographic Features in Premenopausal and Postmenopausal Women

Isabel dos Santos Silva, Nichola Johnson, Bianca De Stavola, Gabriela Torres-Mejía, Olivia Fletcher, Diane S. Allen, Naomi E. Allen, Timothy J. Key, Ian S. Fentiman, Jeff M.P. Holly and Julian Peto
Isabel dos Santos Silva
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Nichola Johnson
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Bianca De Stavola
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gabriela Torres-Mejía
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Olivia Fletcher
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Diane S. Allen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Naomi E. Allen
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Timothy J. Key
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ian S. Fentiman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jeff M.P. Holly
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Julian Peto
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0555 Published March 2006
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

High levels of circulating insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) and its major binding protein (IGFBP-3) at premenopausal ages have been associated with an increased breast cancer risk. We conducted a cross-sectional study (215 premenopausal women and 241 after natural menopause) nested within the Guernsey prospective studies to examine the relationship between the IGF system and mammographic features of the breast. The mammographically dense area in the breast increased with increasing serum levels of IGF-I (P for linear trend, Pt = 0.05), IGF-II (Pt = 0.08), and IGFBP-3 (Pt = 0.01) only in premenopausal women. IGF-II and IGFBP-3 serum levels were associated with increases in the mammographically lucent area in both premenopausal (Pt = 0.01 and 0.04, respectively) and postmenopausal women (Pt < 0.001 for both), but these associations were no longer statistically significant after adjustment for body mass index and waist circumference. Neither the IGF-I/IGFBP-3 nor the IGF-II/IGFBP-3 molar ratio was associated with any of these mammographic features. The number of A alleles at a polymorphic locus in the promoter region of the IGFBP-3 gene was associated with increasing mean IGFBP-3 levels in both premenopausal (Pt = 0.01) and postmenopausal (Pt <0.001) women but not with mammographically dense area. These results support the hypothesis that the IGF system may affect the amount of mammographically dense tissue in premenopausal women, possibly by promoting cell proliferation and inhibiting apoptosis in the fibroglandular tissue. The findings also show strong relations between IGF-II and IGFBP-3 levels and the amount of mammographically lucent tissue, reflecting the associations between body adiposity and amount of fat tissue in the breast and between body adiposity and circulating levels of these growth factors. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(3):449–55)

  • mammographic features
  • mammographic breast density
  • breast cancer
  • insulin-like growth factors
  • genotype

Introduction

The insulin-like growth factor (IGF) axis plays an essential role in the development of the mammary gland. IGF-I and IGF-II have potent mitogenic and antiapoptotic effects and stimulate breast cancer growth in vitro and in vivo (1, 2). High circulating IGF-I levels (as absolute concentrations or relative to its most important binding protein, IGFBP-3; ref. 3) at premenopausal ages, although not at postmenopausal ages, have been found to be associated with a subsequent increase in breast cancer risk (4-7). There is limited epidemiologic data (8, 9) on the association between circulating levels of IGF-II and subsequent breast cancer risk despite the fact that IGF-II circulates at much higher concentrations than IGF-I.

Mammographic breast density is thought to represent fibroepithelial proliferation (10). Women with extensive areas of mammographic density (≥75% of the breast area) have ∼5-fold increase in breast cancer risk compared with those with little density (<5%; ref. 11). Most studies (12-15), although not all (16), reported positive associations between circulating levels of IGF-I and/or IGF-I/IGFBP-3 molar ratio and percentage density in premenopausal women. Only one study (14), however, considered the separate associations of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 with the absolute amounts of radiologically dense (fibroepithelial) and lucent (adipose) tissues of the breast, although another (13) examined the association of these peptides with both percentage density and amount of dense tissue. The absolute amount of dense tissue in the breast may be biologically more relevant than percentage density (17) as it is likely to reflect more closely the number of epithelial cells in the breast and/or their rate of proliferation and thus their probability of suffering a malignant transformation. None of the previous studies examined mammographic features in relation to circulating levels of IGF-II.

Circulating levels of IGFs and their binding proteins are determined by a combination of genetic and environmental factors (18). Known polymorphisms in the IGF-I and IGF-II genes have not been found to be associated with serum levels of their protein products (7, 19) or with breast cancer risk (7). However, several studies have reported an association between an A/C polymorphism in the IGFBP-3 gene at the −202 locus and circulating levels of IGFBP-3 (16, 19-22), and one showed a direct association with percentage breast density (16). Mammographic density is highly heritable (23), and although the relevant genes have not yet been identified, genetic variants involved in the regulation of the IGF system would seem likely candidates.

The aim of this study is to examine the association of IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3 serum levels with size of the radiologically dense and lucent areas of the breast. We also examined whether the previously described A/C polymorphism in the IGFBP-3 promoter region was associated with IGFBP-3 serum levels and mammographic features.

Patients and Methods

Selection of Study Subjects

All women ages ≥34 years, resident in the island of Guernsey, United Kingdom, were invited to participate in a series of prospective studies to investigate the role of endogenous hormones in the etiology of breast cancer (8, 17, 24). A total 5,104 women (response rate = 31%) volunteered to participate in the third study, Guernsey III (GIII), in 1977 to 1985, and were subsequently invited, to participate in Guernsey IV (GIV), in 1986 to 1991 (response rate = 75%). In all, 3,679 women volunteered to participate in both studies. At entry to GIV, women completed an interviewer-administered questionnaire on lifestyle variables and had their anthropometric measurements, a nonfasting blood sample, and mammography taken. The study was approved by the relevant ethics committees, and participants gave written informed consent.

To investigate the relationship between the IGF system and mammographic features, we conducted a cross-sectional study nested within these 3,679 Guernsey women. The study was restricted to premenopausal women (those reporting they were still menstruating in their usual pattern) and natural postmenopausal women (those reporting a natural menopause whose last menstrual period was at least 1 year before entry into GIV; n = 1,168 excluded). Women were further excluded if (a) they had a history of cancer (n = 180); (b) they were on oral contraceptives or hormone replacement therapy at the time of entry into GIV (n = 115); (c) mammograms were no longer available or they had breast implants (n = 192); and (d) the interval between blood sampling and mammography was >60 days or no sample was available (n = 864). Thus, 529 premenopausal and 631 postmenopausal women were eligible, and a random sample comprising 219 premenopausal and 241 postmenopausal women was selected. IGFI, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3 measurements were obtained for 215 premenopausal and 238 postmenopausal women. Clotted blood samples adequate for IGFBP-3 genotyping were available only for a subset (139 premenopausal and 143 postmenopausal women).

Mammographic Measurements

Mammograms were digitized with an Astra 2400S scanner with 8-bit (0-255 grey values) output and mammographic density assessed using a specially developed computer programme (17). Readings from views of the right and left breasts and from craniocaudal and medial-lateral oblique views of the same breast are strongly correlated (r = 0.86-0.96; ref. 25); thus, only the left craniocaudal view was analyzed. For each digitized image, the observer selected interactively two threshold grey levels, one to identify the edge of the breast and a second to identify mammographic densities. The computer programme then calculated the total breast area and the dense area. Lucent area was calculated as the difference between the breast area and the dense area, and percentage breast density was calculated as the percentage of dense area within the breast area. One of the authors (G.T.M.) did all measurements without knowledge of the baseline characteristics or the IGF values of the participants. These computer-assisted measures were found to be highly reproducible in mammograms from a random sample of 102 GIV women: the within-person and between-person intraclass correlation coefficients for measurement of total breast area were both 0.99; the corresponding coefficients for percentage breast density were 0.94 (95% confidence interval, 0.91-0.98) and 0.92 (95% confidence interval, 0.89-0.94), respectively (17).

Laboratory Measurements

GIV serum samples were stored at −20°C until they were shipped on dry ice to the Division of Surgery, University of Bristol, United Kingdom for measurements of serum IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3. All samples were analyzed in the same laboratory batch, technicians being blind to the baseline and mammographic characteristics of the women. Double-antibody ELISA assays were used to measure IGF-I (DSL-10-2800 Active) and IGF-II (DSL-10-2600; Diagnostic Systems Laboratories, Webster, Texas). Assays for serum IGFBP-3 were carried out using a previously validated in-house double-antibody RIA (26). Total coefficients of variations (intra-assay and inter-assay combined) in the Guernsey studies have been found to be 6.6% for IGF-I, 12.0% for IGF-II, and 3.9% for IGFBP-3 (8). The serum samples were stored for a median of 15 years (range, 13-17 years), but there was no correlation between hormone concentrations and storage time (r = 0.004 for IGF-I, r = 0.065 for IGF-II, and r = −0.026 for IGFBP-3).

Genomic DNA was extracted from 200 μL of clotted blood (following overnight digestion with 10 units streptokinase; Sigma, St. Louis, MO) using the QIAamp DNA Blood Mini kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA). The IGFBP-3 polymorphism at position −202 relative to the CAP site was genotyped by PCR amplification using primers IGFBP-3 −392 (5′-ACCGGCTCGCCGCAGGGAGA-3′) and IGFBP-3 −119 (5′-GGGCCCGTGCTTCGCCCTGA-3′) followed by restriction digestion with HhaI. Reaction conditions are available upon request. A negative control and two IGFBP3 A/C heterozygote controls were included in each PCR. The genotype of each sample was independently assigned by two observers (100% concordance observed) and was repeated in duplicate (53% samples) or triplicate (10% samples). A proportion of samples of each genotype were sequenced for confirmation, and the genotype frequencies were determined to be in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium.

Statistical Analysis

Data for premenopausal and postmenopausal women were analyzed separately as the effect of IGFs on mammographic features may differ by menopausal status (12, 13, 15). Serum hormone levels and percentage breast density were normally distributed. A natural logarithm transformation was used to normalize the distributions of size of the dense and lucent areas. IGF-I/IGFBP-3 and IGF-II/IGFBP-3 molar ratios were estimated after converting the IGFs and IGFBP-3 values from ng/mL to nmol/L by multiplying them by factors 0.13 and 0.025, respectively. Linear regression models were fitted to assess the association of IGF levels with mammographic features, and to examine the association of IGFBP-3 genotype with IGFBP-3 serum levels and mammographic features. Separate models were fitted with quantitative exposure variables in their original continuous scale and after categorization by dividing their distributions into fourths, but as they gave similar results, only results from the latter are reported. Tests for linear trend and heterogeneity in arithmetic mean of the outcome variable (or of its logged values) across exposure categories were calculated using likelihood ratio tests (27). Ps are two sided. Statistical analyses were carried out in STATA (28).

Results

The characteristics of the study women are summarized in Table 1. There were no marked differences between these women and those who would have been eligible if an appropriate serum sample had been available. Mean IGF-I levels were higher in premenopausal than in postmenopausal women, but there were no clear differences in IGF-II or IGFBP-3 levels by menopausal status. Size of dense area and percentage breast density were higher in premenopausal women, whereas the size of lucent area was higher in postmenopausal women. IGF-I levels were positively correlated with IGF-II levels in premenopausal and postmenopausal women (Pearson's correlation coefficient, r = 0.38, P < 0.001; r = 0.39, P < 0.001, respectively). IGFBP-3 levels were positively correlated with both IGF-I levels (r = 0.54, P < 0.001; r = 0.54, P < 0.001) and IGF-II levels (r = 0.58, P < 0.001; r = 0.65, P < 0.001) in premenopausal and postmenopausal women, respectively.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Characteristics of the study participants by menopausal status

Age was associated with decreasing levels of IGF-I (P for change in mean level with 1-year increase in age = 0.01) and IGFBP-3 (P < 0.001) but not IGF-II in postmenopausal women only. After adjustment for age and time since blood collection, levels of IGF-II and IGFBP-3 but not IGF-I increased with increasing body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (P for change in mean IGF-II with 1-unit increase in BMI < 0.001 in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women; corresponding Ps for IGFBP-3: 0.006 and <0.001, respectively). In premenopausal women, IGF-I was negatively associated with being a current smoker (P = 0.03) and a past oral contraceptive user (P = 0.03). IGFBP-3 was also negatively associated with past oral contraceptive use (P = 0.01) among premenopausal women, whereas IGF-II was negatively associated with age at first birth among postmenopausal parous women (P for change in mean IGF-II with 1-year increase in age at first birth = 0.03).

In premenopausal women, there was some evidence of an increase in the dense area with increasing fourths of IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3, and these trends became stronger after adjustment for body adiposity and other variables (Table 2). After further adjustment of the IGF-I and IGF-II effects for IGFBP-3 levels and of the IGFBP-3 effect for IGF-I and IGF-II levels, none remained statistically significant. Lucent area was positively associated with IGF-II and IGFBP-3, but these associations were no longer significant after adjusting for BMI and waist circumference as these variables were strongly correlated with lucent area (r ∼0.66-0.71, P < 0.001 in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women). Percentage density was not associated with IGF-I, IGF-II, or IGFBP-3 in premenopausal women. In postmenopausal women, there was no evidence of an association between dense area and IGF-I, IGF-II, or IGFBP-3 before or after adjustment for body adiposity and other variables (Table 3). These peptides were, however, positively associated with lucent area and inversely associated with percentage density, but these trends were no longer significant after adjusting for body adiposity. Further adjustment for the levels of the other peptides did not affect the results. There were no associations between IGF-I/IGFBP-3 and IGF-II/IGFBP-3 molar ratios and mammographic features in premenopausal or postmenopausal women.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Mammographic features by fourths of IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3 serum levels in premenopausal women

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3.

Mammographic features by fourths of IGF-I, IGF-II and IGFBP-3 serum levels in postmenopausal women

There were no marked baseline, mammographic, or IGF serum differences between genotyped and nongenotyped women. As observed for the whole study population, there was a positive association between IGFBP-3 serum levels and lucent area in both premenopausal and postmenopausal genotyped women (data not shown). A positive linear trend in the mean IGFBP-3 serum levels by number of A alleles at the −202 locus was observed, although in premenopausal women, this trend was attenuated after adjusting for body adiposity and other variables (Table 4). This SNP accounted for 5% (R2 = 0.05) of the total variance in IGFBP-3 serum levels in premenopausal and 16% (R2 = 0.16) in postmenopausal women. There were no linear associations between number of A alleles and dense area or percentage density. In premenopausal women, the number of A alleles was positively associated with lucent area, but this trend was no longer statistically significant after adjustment for body adiposity.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4.

Serum IGFBP-3 levels and mammographic features by IGFBP-3 genotype in premenopausal and postmenopausal women

Discussion

One of the strengths of this study is that it was possible to examine the effects of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 separately on the amounts of radiologically dense and lucent breast tissues. This study was also the first to have examined the role of serum levels of IGF-II and the second (16) to have assessed the role of IGFBP-3 genotype. The reliability of the mammographic measurements was very high (17), and both percentage density and size of the dense area were strong predictors of subsequent breast cancer risk in the Guernsey studies (17). Variations in breast density through the menstrual cycle have been reported (29), but they are far too small to have affected substantially our findings in premenopausal women. Our IGF measurements were based on a single serum sample, but this seems to be adequate to reliably measure long-term levels of these peptides (30, 31). Although the samples were stored at −20°C for a long period, the mean peptide levels observed in this study were similar to those reported by others (7) and uncorrelated with time since blood collection.

Our findings are consistent with high IGF-I serum levels being associated with modest increases in the size of the dense area in premenopausal women. IGF-I levels were found to be positively associated with percentage density in premenopausal women in all previous studies (12-15) but one (16). The direction of the IGF-I dense area association is compatible with the positive association between premenopausal IGF-I levels and breast cancer risk found in practically all prospective studies that have examined this relationship (4-7).

Our study is consistent with a possible positive association, although only of borderline statistical significance, between IGF-II levels and dense area in premenopausal women. No association between IGF-II and breast cancer risk was observed in the Guernsey studies (8), the only prospective study to have thus far examined this relationship in premenopausal women. A positive association between postmenopausal IGF-II levels and risk of breast cancer was reported in one recent prospective study (9).

Previous studies have reported either an inverse (12-15) or a null (16) association between IGFBP-3 levels and percentage density and/or size of dense area. Our observation of a significant positive relationship between IGFBP-3 and dense area in premenopausal women is, however, consistent with a positive association between premenopausal levels of this peptide and risk of breast cancer reported by most, but not all, prospective studies that have examined the IGFBP-3/breast cancer association (4-7). Some of the discrepancies in the literature regarding the role of IGFBP-3 might be related to assay methodology (32). We used a well-validated assay that is calibrated against recombinant glycosylated IGFBP-3 that dilutes in parallel with the IGFBP-3 being measured in serum samples (26).

The modest associations between IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3 and dense area in premenopausal women observed in this study suggest a direct growth-stimulating effect of the IGF system on the fibroepithelial tissue of the breast. The individual role of each one of these three peptide is, however, difficult to establish as their levels were strongly correlated. IGFs can also be produced locally and act in an autocrine/paracrine way. Breast tissue sections from premenopausal subjects with extensive densities were found to have larger stained areas of IGF-I when compared with subjects with little density (33). Thus, it is conceivable that mammographic density may be a better surrogate for IGFs/IGFBP-3 bioavailability in the breast tissue than circulating levels of these peptides. The fact that the IGFs and IGFBP-3 associations with dense tissue, and with breast cancer risk, are restricted to premenopausal women may indicate a more important role of the IGF axis early in life and/or a synergistic effect with sex hormones (34).

The positive associations of IGF-II and IGFBP-3 levels with lucent area in premenopausal and postmenopausal women, which disappeared after adjustment for body adiposity, are likely to reflect the associations of these peptides with body adiposity, and the relation of body adiposity with the amount of lucent tissue in the breast. Similarly to our study, others, although not all (35, 36), reported positive associations between BMI and IGFBP-3 but no association between BMI and IGF-I (37-39).

This study, like others (16, 19-22), showed a positive association between the number of A alleles at a previously described functional polymorphic locus in the promoter region of the IGFBP-3 gene and IGFBP-3 serum levels in both premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Deal et al. (20) found a significantly higher promoter activity of the A allele compared with the C allele in vitro, suggesting that this IGFBP-3 polymorphism influences gene expression. The only other study to have thus far examined the role of this polymorphism on mammographic features reported positive associations of number of A alleles with both IGFBP-3 serum levels and percent density in premenopausal women only, but surprisingly, IGFBP-3 serum levels had no effect on percentage density (16). We found no association between IGFBP-3 genotype and dense area (or percent density) but the study had limited power to detect small differences (about 250 women in each genotype stratum would be required to ensure that the study had 90% power, at the 5% significance level, to detect the 10% absolute difference in mean percentage density between genotypes AA and CC reported by Lai et al.; ref. 16).

The study of hormonal determinants of mammographic features is important as these may be used as intermediate markers in studies investigating the etiology of breast cancer or testing new preventive strategies (40, 41). The cross-sectional design of the study makes it impossible to establish temporality, but the modest associations of IGF-I, IGF-II, and IGFBP-3 serum levels with the amount of mammographically dense tissue in premenopausal women are consistent with the hypothesis that the IGF system may somehow promote growth of the fibroepithelial tissue in the breast.

Footnotes

  • Grant support: Cancer Research UK; Consejo Nacional de Ciencia Y Tecnología, Mexico scholarship (G. Torres-Mejía); and Lloyds TSB Foundation for the Channel Islands (D. Allen).

  • The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

  • Note: G. Torres-Mejía is currently at the Center for Population Health Research, National Institute of Public Health, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico.

    • Accepted January 16, 2006.
    • Received July 27, 2005.
    • Revision received November 22, 2005.

References

  1. ↵
    Wood TL, Yee D. Introduction: IGFs and IGFPBs in the normal mammary gland and in breast cancer. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia 2000;5:1–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    Sachdev D, Yee D. The IGF system and breast cancer. Endocr Relat Cancer 2001;8:197–209.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  3. ↵
    Le Roith D. Insulin-like growth factors. N Engl J Med 1997;336:633–40.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    Renehan AG, Zwahlen M, Minder C, O'Dwyer ST, Shalet SM, Egger M. Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I, IGF binding protein-3, and cancer risk: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. Lancet 2004;363:1346–53.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. Sugumar A, Liu YC, Xia Q, Koh YS, Matsuo K. Insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I and IGF-binding protein 3 and the risk of premenopausal breast cancer: a meta-analysis of literature. Int J Cancer 2004;111:293–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. Shi R, Yu H, McLLarty J, Glass J. IGF-I and breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Int J Cancer 2004;111:418–23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    Fletcher O, Gibson L, Johnson N, et al. Polymorphisms and circulating levels in the insulin-like growth factor system and risk of breast cancer: a systematic review. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:2–19.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    Allen NE, Roddam AW, Allen DS, et al. A prospective study of serum insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), IGF-II, IGF binding protein-3 and breast cancer risk. Br J Cancer 2005;92:1283–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    Gronbaek H, Flyvbjerg A, Mellemkjaer L, et al. Serum insulin-like growth factors, insulin-like growth factor binding proteins, and breast cancer risk in post-menopausal women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13:1759–64.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Li T, Sun L, Miller N, et al. The association of measured breast tissue characteristics with mammographic density and other risk factors for breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:343–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    Boyd NF, Lockwood GA, Byng JW, Tritchler DL, Yaffe MJ. Mammographic densities and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1998;7:1133–44.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  12. ↵
    Byrne C, Colditz GA, Willett WC, Speizer FE, Pollack M, Hankinson SE. Plasma insulin-like growth factor (IGF-I), IGF-binding protein 3, and mammographic density. Cancer Res 2000;60:3744–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    Boyd NF, Stone J, Martin LJ, et al. The association of breast mitogens with mammographic densities. Br J Cancer 2002;87:876–82.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. ↵
    Maskarinec G, Williams AE, Kaaks R. A cross-sectional investigation of breast density and insulin-like growth factor I. Int J Cancer 2003;107:991–6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    Diorio C, Pollak M, Byrne C, et al. Insulin-like growth factor-1, IGF-binding protein-3, and mammographic breast density. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:1065–73.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. ↵
    Lai JH, Vesprini D, Zhang W, Yaffe MJ, Pollak M, Narod SA. A polymorphic locus in the promoter region of the IGFBP3 gene is related to mammographic breast density. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13:573–82.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    Torres-Mejia G, De Stavola B, Allen DS, et al. Mammographic features and subsequent risk of breast cancer: a comparison of qualitative and quantitative evaluations in the Guernsey prospective studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:1052–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  18. ↵
    Harrela M, Koistienen H, Kaprio J, et al. Genetic and environmental components of inter-individual variation in circulating levels of IGF-I, IGF-II and IGFBP-3. J Clin Invest 1996;98:2612–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    Wong H-L, DeLellis K, Probst-Hensch N, et al. A new single nucleotide polymorphism in the insulin-like growth factor I regulatory region associates with colorectal cancer risk in Singapore Chinese. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:144–51.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. ↵
    Deal C, Ma J, Wilkin F, et al. Novel promoter polymorphism in insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3: correlation with serum levels and interaction with known regulators. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2001;86:1274–80.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. Jërnstrom H, Deal C, Wilkin F, et al. Genetic and nongenetic factors associated with variation of plasma levels of insulin-like growth factor-I and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3 in healthy premenopausal women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001;10:377–84.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. ↵
    Schernhammer ES, Hankinson SE, Hunter DJ, Blouin MJ, Pollak MN. Polymorphic variation at the -202 locus in IGFBP3: influence on serum levels of insulin-like growth factors, interaction with plasma retinol and vitamin D and breast cancer risk. Int J Cancer 2003;107:60–4.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    Boyd NF, Dite GS, Stone J, et al. Heritability of mammographic density, a risk factor for breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:886–94.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    Bulbrook RD. The Guernsey Trial. A prospective investigation of hormone patterns and subsequent breast cancer. Nurs Mirror Midwives J 1968;127:20–3.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  25. ↵
    Byng JW, Boyd NF, Lockwood G, Fishell E, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ. Symmetry of projection in the quantitative analysis of mammographic densities. Eur J Cancer Prev 1996;5:319–27.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    Cheetham TD, Holly JM, Baxter RC, et al. The effects of recombinant human IGF-I administration on concentrations of acid labile subunit, IGF binding protein-3, IGF-I, IGF-II and proteolysis of IGF binding protein-3 in adolescents with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. J Endocrinol 1998;157:81–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  27. ↵
    Clayton D, Hills M. Statistical models in epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1993.
  28. ↵
    Stata Corporation. Stata 8 reference manual. College Station (TX): Stata Corp.; 2003.
  29. ↵
    White E, Velentgas P, Mandelson MT, et al. Variations in mamographic breast density by time in menstrual cycle among women aged 40–49 years. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90:906–10.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. ↵
    Kaaks R, Toniolo P, Akhmedkhanov A, et al. Serum C-peptide, insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I, IGF binding proteins, and colorectal cancer risk in women. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1592–600.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  31. ↵
    Borofsky ND, Vogelman JH, Krajcik RA, Orentreich N. Utility of insulin-like growth factor-1 as a biomarker in epidemiological studies. Clin Chem 2002;48:2248–51.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  32. ↵
    Rinaldi S, Kaaks R, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A, et al. Insulin-like growth factor-I, IGF biding protein-3, and breast cancer in young women: a comparison of risk estimates using different peptide assays. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14:48–52.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. ↵
    Gu Y-P, Martin LJ, Hanna W, et al. Growth factors and stromal matrix proteins associated with mammographic densities. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2001;10:243–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  34. ↵
    Yu H, Shu XO, Li BD, et al. Joint effect of insulin-like growth factors and sex steroids on breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003;12:1067–73.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. ↵
    Chang S, Wu X, Yu H, Spitz MR. Plasma concentrations of insulin-like growth factors among healthy adult men and postmenopausal women: associations with body composition, lifestyle, and reproductive factors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:758–66.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  36. ↵
    Lukanova A, Lundin E, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A, et al. Body mass index, circulating levels of sex-steroid hormones, IGF-I and IGF-binding protein-3: a cross-sectional study in healthy women. Eur J Endocrinol 2004;150:161–71.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  37. ↵
    Voskuil DW, Bueno de Mesquita HB, Kaaks R, et al. Determinants of circulating insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I and IGF binding proteins 1–3 in premenopausal women: physical activity and anthropometry (Netherlands). Cancer Causes Control 2001;12:951–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. Holmes MD, Pollak MN, Hankinson SE. Lifestyle correlates of plasma insulin-like growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 concentrations. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:862–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. ↵
    Allen NE, Appleby PN, Kaaks R, Rinaldi S, Davey GK, Key TJ. Lifestyle determinants of serum insulin-like growth-factor-I (IGF-I), C-peptide and hormone binding protein levels in British women. Cancer Causes Control 2003;14:65–74.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    Spicer DV, Ursin G, Parisky YR, et al. Changes in mammographic densities by a hormonal contraceptive designed to reduce breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994;86:431–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  41. ↵
    Ursin G, Pike MC, Spicer DV. Can mammographic densities predict effects of tamoxifen on the breast? J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;88:128–9.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention: 15 (3)
March 2006
Volume 15, Issue 3
  • Table of Contents

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Insulin-Like Growth Factor System and Mammographic Features in Premenopausal and Postmenopausal Women
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The Insulin-Like Growth Factor System and Mammographic Features in Premenopausal and Postmenopausal Women
Isabel dos Santos Silva, Nichola Johnson, Bianca De Stavola, Gabriela Torres-Mejía, Olivia Fletcher, Diane S. Allen, Naomi E. Allen, Timothy J. Key, Ian S. Fentiman, Jeff M.P. Holly and Julian Peto
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev March 1 2006 (15) (3) 449-455; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0555

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
The Insulin-Like Growth Factor System and Mammographic Features in Premenopausal and Postmenopausal Women
Isabel dos Santos Silva, Nichola Johnson, Bianca De Stavola, Gabriela Torres-Mejía, Olivia Fletcher, Diane S. Allen, Naomi E. Allen, Timothy J. Key, Ian S. Fentiman, Jeff M.P. Holly and Julian Peto
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev March 1 2006 (15) (3) 449-455; DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0555
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Gallstones and Gallbladder Cancer
  • Additive Effects of Aristolochic Acid and Arsenic in UTUC
  • Provider Lifestyle Discussions
Show more Research Articles
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   YouTube   RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
eISSN: 1538-7755
ISSN: 1055-9965

Advertisement