Table 2.

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

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 feature
Hainline, 1978 (45)MCC. Cases: Duke Hospital, United States, 1974-1976; controls: asymptomatic screenees. Match: A, R171:17135-70+Wolfe*
Weich, 1981 (46)CC. Cases: Rambam Medical Centre; controls: screening program, Israel. 1974-1979. Adj: A.442:1,00030-60+Wolfe
Boyd, 1982 (28)MCC. Cases: Women's College Hospital, Canada, 1973-1979; controls: screening volunteers. Match: A, YR.183:18336-65Wolfe, PD
Brisson, 1982 (47)CC. Case: 2 U.S. hospitals, 1972-78; controls: referred for routine/baseline mammogram. Adj: none.408:1,02120-60+Wolfe, PN, PH
Janzon, 1982 (48)XS. Malmo breast cancer screening project, Sweden. 1977-NK. Adj: A.118:14,99240-69Wolfe
Tabar, 1982 (49)XS. Consecutive screens at Kopparberg County screening programme, Sweden. Adj: A.187:26,97040-75+Wolfe
Chaudary, 1983 (50)CC. Cases: Guy's hospital London 1980-1982; controls: Guernsey screening, United Kingdom. Adj: none.60:937NKWolfe
Brisson, 1984 (51)CC. Cases: 3 hospitals in Boston and New Jersey, United States, 1978-1979; controls: referred for a “routine” mammogram. Adj: A, HT, WT.362:686Pre, postWolfe, PN, PH
Horwitz, 1984 (52)MCC. Cases: Yale-New Haven Hospital, United States, 1976-1979; controls: women with clinically normal mammograms. Match: A, R. Adj: no other.105:103>45 and postWolfe
Brisson, 1989 (53)CC. Cases: treated in Quebec, 1982-1984; controls: Quebec screening study, Canada. Adj: A, WT, P, EDUC.290:64540-62Wolfe, PD
Jakes, 2000 (54)MCC. Cases: prevalent and incident screen cancers, Singapore, 1995-1996; controls: negative screen cancer. Match: A. Adj: AM, AFB, breast feeding.174:34845-69Tabar
Lam, 2000 (55)MCC. Vermont breast cancer surveillance system, United States, 1996-1997. Match: A. Adj: A, WT.381:1,547PostBIRADS
Brisson, 2003 (56)CC. Pooling of Brisson, 1982 (47), 1984 (51), and 1989 (53). Adj: A, WT.1,060:2,35220-95PD
Nagao, 2003 (57)MCC. Cases: Gifu hospital, Japan, 1998-1999; controls: screening. Match: A, number of deliveries. Adj: AFB, no. births.237:742NKWolfe, other
Ursin, 2003 (1)CC. Two CC studies at University of Southern California, United States, 1994-1998. Match (frequency): A, R. Adj: A, BMI, P, HRT, AM, FH, MP, AFB.622:43335-64PD
Kerlikowske, 2005 (58)CC. San Francisco Mammography Register, United States, 1992-2002. Adj: A, FH, AFB, R, BMI, bone mineral density.208:436Mean 63.6 (SD, 9.4)PD
Nagata, 2005 (59)CC. Cases and controls: Gifu City Hospital mass screening program, Japan, 2000-2002. Adj: A, BMI, AM, AFB, P, HRT, breast feeding, FH, MP.71:370 pre, 75:289 post30-80PD
  • Abbreviations: MCC, matched case-control; XS, cross-sectional study; PN, percentage nodularities; PH, percentage homogeneous densities; post: postmenopausal; pre, premenopausal.

  • * Hainline, 1978 does not appear in Figs., as no estimates of precision were provided.

  • Results for percentage nodularity do not appear in Figs., as these three studies are subsets of Brisson, 2003, which is included.