Purpose

Women with proliferative breast lesions are candidates for primary prevention, but few risk models incorporate benign findings to assess breast cancer risk. We incorporated benign breast disease (BBD) diagnoses into the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) risk model, the only breast cancer risk assessment tool that uses breast density.

Methods

We developed and validated a competing-risk model using 2000 to 2010 SEER data for breast cancer incidence and 2010 vital statistics to adjust for the competing risk of death. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the relative hazards for age, race/ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, history of breast biopsy, BBD diagnoses, and breast density in the BCSC.

Results

We included 1,135,977 women age 35 to 74 years undergoing mammography with no history of breast cancer; 17% of the women had a prior breast biopsy. During a mean follow-up of 6.9 years, 17,908 women were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer. The BCSC BBD model slightly overpredicted risk (expected-to-observed ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.06) and had modest discriminatory accuracy (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, 0.665). Among women with proliferative findings, adding BBD to the model increased the proportion of women with an estimated 5-year risk of 3% or higher from 9.3% to 27.8% (P<.001).

Conclusion

The BCSC BBD model accurately estimates women's risk for breast cancer using breast density and BBD diagnoses. Greater numbers of high-risk women eligible for primary prevention after BBD diagnosis are identified using the BCSC BBD model.

Breast cancer risk assessment can inform the use of screening and prevention modalities. We investigated the performance of the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) risk model in combination with a polygenic risk score (PRS) comprised of 83 single nucleotide polymorphisms identified from genome-wide association studies. We conducted a nested case-control study of 486 cases and 495 matched controls within a screening cohort. The PRS was calculated using a Bayesian approach. The contributions of the PRS and variables in the BCSC model to breast cancer risk were tested using conditional logistic regression. Discriminatory accuracy of the models was compared using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC). Increasing quartiles of the PRS were positively associated with breast cancer risk, with OR 2.54 (95 % CI 1.69-3.82) for breast cancer in the highest versus lowest quartile. In a multivariable model, the PRS, family history, and breast density remained strong risk factors. The AUROC of the PRS was 0.60 (95 % CI 0.57-0.64), and an Asian-specific PRS had AUROC 0.64 (95 % CI 0.53-0.74). A combined model including the BCSC risk factors and PRS had better discrimination than the BCSC model (AUROC 0.65 versus 0.62, p = 0.01). The BCSC-PRS model classified 18 % of cases as high-risk (5-year risk ≥3 %), compared with 7 % using the BCSC model. The PRS improved discrimination of the BCSC risk model and classified more cases as high-risk. Further consideration of the PRS's role in decision-making around screening and prevention strategies is merited.

Abstract Introduction Understanding whether mammographic density (MD) is associated with all breast tumor subtypes and whether the strength of association varies by age is important for utilizing MD in risk models. Methods Data were pooled from six studies including 3414 women with breast cancer and 7199 without who underwent screening mammography. Percent MD was assessed from digitized film-screen mammograms using a computer-assisted threshold technique. We used polytomous logistic regression to calculate breast cancer odds according to tumor type, histopathological characteristics, and receptor (estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2)) status by age (<55, 55–64, and ≥65 years). Results MD was positively associated with risk of invasive tumors across all ages, with a two-fold increased risk for high (>51%) versus average density (11-25%). Women ages <55 years with high MD had stronger increased risk of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) compared to women ages 55–64 and ≥65 years (P age-interaction = 0.02). Among all ages, MD had a stronger association with large (>2.1 cm) versus small tumors and positive versus negative lymph node status (P’s < 0.01). For women ages <55 years, there was a stronger association of MD with ER-negative breast cancer than ER-positive tumors compared to women ages 55–64 and ≥65 years (P age-interaction = 0.04). MD was positively associated with both HER2-negative and HER2-positive tumors within each age group. Conclusion MD is strongly associated with all breast cancer subtypes, but particularly tumors of large size and positive lymph nodes across all ages, and ER-negative status among women ages <55 years, suggesting high MD may play an important role in tumor aggressiveness, especially in younger women.

The ectodysplasin receptor (EDAR) is a tumor necrosis factor receptor (TNF) superfamily member. A substitution in an exon of EDAR at position 370 (EDARV370A) creates a gain of function mutant present at high frequencies in Asian and Indigenous American populations but absent in others. Its frequency is intermediate in populations of Mexican ancestry. EDAR regulates the development of ectodermal tissues, including mammary ducts. Obesity and type 2 diabetes mellitus are prevalent in people with Indigenous and Latino ancestry. Latino patients also have altered prevalence and presentation of breast cancer. It is unknown whether EDARV370A might connect these phenomena. The goals of this study were to determine 1) whether EDARV370A is associated with metabolic phenotypes and 2) if there is altered breast anatomy in women carrying EDARV370A. Participants were from two Latino cohorts, the Arizona Insulin Resistance (AIR) registry and Sangre por Salud (SPS) biobank. The frequency of EDARV370A was 47% in the Latino cohorts. In the AIR registry, carriers of EDARV370A (GG homozygous) had significantly (p < 0.05) higher plasma triglycerides, VLDL, ALT, 2-hour post-challenge glucose, and a higher prevalence of prediabetes/diabetes. In a subset of the AIR registry, serum levels of ectodysplasin A2 (EDA-A2) also were associated with HbA1c and prediabetes (p < 0.05). For the SPS biobank, participants that were carriers of EDARV370A had lower breast density and higher HbA1c (both p < 0.05). The significant associations with measures of glycemia remained when the cohorts were combined. We conclude that EDARV370A is associated with characteristics of the metabolic syndrome and breast density in Latinos.

Background

In 30 states, women who have had screening mammography are informed of their breast density on the basis of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density categories estimated subjectively by radiologists. Variation in these clinical categories across and within radiologists has led to discussion about whether automated BI-RADS density should be reported instead.

Objective

To determine whether breast cancer risk and detection are similar for automated and clinical BI-RADS density measures.

Design

Case-control.

Setting

San Francisco Mammography Registry and Mayo Clinic.

Participants

1609 women with screen-detected cancer, 351 women with interval invasive cancer, and 4409 matched control participants.

Measurements

Automated and clinical BI-RADS density assessed on digital mammography at 2 time points from September 2006 to October 2014, interval and screen-detected breast cancer risk, and mammography sensitivity.

Results

Of women whose breast density was categorized by automated BI-RADS more than 6 months to 5 years before diagnosis, those with extremely dense breasts had a 5.65-fold higher interval cancer risk (95% CI, 3.33 to 9.60) and a 1.43-fold higher screen-detected risk (CI, 1.14 to 1.79) than those with scattered fibroglandular densities. Associations of interval and screen-detected cancer with clinical BI-RADS density were similar to those with automated BI-RADS density, regardless of whether density was measured more than 6 months to less than 2 years or 2 to 5 years before diagnosis. Automated and clinical BI-RADS density measures had similar discriminatory accuracy, which was higher for interval than screen-detected cancer (c-statistics: 0.70 vs. 0.62 [P < 0.001] and 0.72 vs. 0.62 [P < 0.001], respectively). Mammography sensitivity was similar for automated and clinical BI-RADS categories: fatty, 93% versus 92%; scattered fibroglandular densities, 90% versus 90%; heterogeneously dense, 82% versus 78%; and extremely dense, 63% versus 64%, respectively.

Limitation

Neither automated nor clinical BI-RADS density was assessed on tomosynthesis, an emerging breast screening method.

Conclusion

Automated and clinical BI-RADS density similarly predict interval and screen-detected cancer risk, suggesting that either measure may be used to inform women of their breast density.

Primary funding source

National Cancer Institute.

Background

Accurately identifying women with dense breasts (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] heterogeneously or extremely dense) who are at high breast cancer risk will facilitate discussions of supplemental imaging and primary prevention. We examined the independent contribution of dense breast volume and BI-RADS breast density to predict invasive breast cancer and whether dense breast volume combined with Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) risk model factors (age, race/ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, history of breast biopsy, and BI-RADS breast density) improves identifying women with dense breasts at high breast cancer risk.

Methods

We conducted a case-control study of 1720 women with invasive cancer and 3686 control subjects. We calculated ORs and 95% CIs for the effect of BI-RADS breast density and Volpara™ automated dense breast volume on invasive cancer risk, adjusting for other BCSC risk model factors plus body mass index (BMI), and we compared C-statistics between models. We calculated BCSC 5-year breast cancer risk, incorporating the adjusted ORs associated with dense breast volume.

Results

Compared with women with BI-RADS scattered fibroglandular densities and second-quartile dense breast volume, women with BI-RADS extremely dense breasts and third- or fourth-quartile dense breast volume (75% of women with extremely dense breasts) had high breast cancer risk (OR 2.87, 95% CI 1.84-4.47, and OR 2.56, 95% CI 1.87-3.52, respectively), whereas women with extremely dense breasts and first- or second-quartile dense breast volume were not at significantly increased breast cancer risk (OR 1.53, 95% CI 0.75-3.09, and OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.82-2.73, respectively). Adding continuous dense breast volume to a model with BCSC risk model factors and BMI increased discriminatory accuracy compared with a model with only BCSC risk model factors (C-statistic 0.639, 95% CI 0.623-0.654, vs. C-statistic 0.614, 95% CI 0.598-0.630, respectively; P < 0.001). Women with dense breasts and fourth-quartile dense breast volume had a BCSC 5-year risk of 2.5%, whereas women with dense breasts and first-quartile dense breast volume had a 5-year risk ≤ 1.8%.

Conclusions

Risk models with automated dense breast volume combined with BI-RADS breast density may better identify women with dense breasts at high breast cancer risk than risk models with either measure alone.

High alcohol intake and breast density increase breast cancer (BC) risk, but their interrelationship is unknown. We examined whether volumetric density modifies and/or mediates the alcohol-BC association. BC cases (n = 2233) diagnosed from 2006 to 2013 in the San Francisco Bay area had screening mammograms 6 or more months before diagnosis; controls (n = 4562) were matched on age, mammogram date, race or ethnicity, facility, and mammography machine. Logistic regression was used to estimate alcohol-BC associations adjusted for age, body mass index, and menopause; interaction terms assessed modification. Percent mediation was quantified as the ratio of log (odds ratios [ORs]) from models with and without density measures. Alcohol consumption was associated with increased BC risk (2-sided Ptrend = .004), as were volumetric percent density (OR = 1.45 per SD, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.36 to 1.56) and dense volume (OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.24 to 1.37). Breast density did not modify the alcohol-BC association (2-sided P > .10 for all). Dense volume mediated 25.0% (95% CI = 5.5% to 44.4%) of the alcohol-BC association (2-sided P = .01), suggesting alcohol may partially increase BC risk by increasing fibroglandular tissue.

OBJECTIVE. Our previous work showed that variation measures, which represent breast architecture derived from mammograms, were significantly associated with breast cancer. For replication purposes, we examined the association of three variation measures (variation [V], which is measured in the image domain, and P₁ and p₁ [a normalized version of P₁], which are derived from restricted regions in the Fourier domain) with breast cancer risk in an independent population. We also compared these measures to volumetric density measures (volumetric percent density [VPD] and dense volume [DV]) from a commercial product. MATERIALS AND METHODS. We examined 514 patients with breast cancer and 1377 control patients from a screening practice who were matched for age, date of examination, mammography unit, facility, and state of residence. Spearman rank-order correlation was used to evaluate the monotonic association between measures. Breast cancer associations were estimated using conditional logistic regression, after adjustment for age and body mass index. Odds ratios were calculated per SD increment in mammographic measure. RESULTS. These variation measures were strongly correlated with VPD (correlation, 0.68-0.80) but not with DV (correlation, 0.31-0.48). Similar to previous findings, all variation measures were significantly associated with breast cancer (odds ratio per SD: 1.30 [95% CI, 1.16-1.46] for V, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.35-1.77] for P₁, and 1.51 [95% CI, 1.33-1.72] for p₁). Associations of volumetric density measures with breast cancer were similar (odds ratio per SD: 1.54 [95% CI, 1.33-1.78] for VPD and 1.34 [95% CI, 1.20-1.50] for DV). When DV was included with each variation measure in the same model, all measures retained significance. CONCLUSION. Variation measures were significantly associated with breast cancer risk (comparable to the volumetric density measures) but were independent of the DV.

Background

Benign breast disease is an important risk factor for breast cancer. We studied a large group of women with benign breast disease to obtain reliable estimates of this risk.

Methods

We identified all women who received a diagnosis of benign breast disease at the Mayo Clinic between 1967 and 1991. Breast-cancer events were obtained from medical records and questionnaires. To estimate relative risks, we compared the number of observed breast cancers with the number expected on the basis of the rates of breast cancer in the Iowa Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry.

Results

We followed 9087 women for a median of 15 years. The histologic findings were nonproliferative lesions in 67 percent of women, proliferative lesions without atypia in 30 percent, and atypical hyperplasia in 4 percent. To date, 707 breast cancers have developed. The relative risk of breast cancer for the cohort was 1.56 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.45 to 1.68), and this increased risk persisted for at least 25 years after biopsy. The relative risk associated with atypia was 4.24 (95 percent confidence interval, 3.26 to 5.41), as compared with a relative risk of 1.88 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.66 to 2.12) for proliferative changes without atypia and of 1.27 (95 percent confidence interval, 1.15 to 1.41) for nonproliferative lesions. The strength of the family history of breast cancer, available for 4808 women, was a risk factor that was independent of histologic findings. No increased risk was found among women with no family history and nonproliferative findings. In the first 10 years after the initial biopsy, an excess of cancers occurred in the same breast, especially in women with atypia.

Conclusions

Risk factors for breast cancer after the diagnosis of benign breast disease include the histologic classification of a benign breast lesion and a family history of breast cancer.