Differential impact of body mass index on absolute and percent breast density: implications regarding their use as breast cancer risk biomarkers
- 389 Downloads
Percent breast density (PBD), a commonly used biomarker of breast cancer risk (BCR), is confounded by the influence of non-dense breast tissue on its measurement and factors, such as BMI, which have an impact on non-dense tissue. Consequently, BMI, a potent BCR factor, is, paradoxically, negatively correlated with PBD. We propose that absolute breast density (ABD) is a more accurate biomarker of BCR. We used a volumetric method to compare the correlation between PBD and ABD with baseline demographics and dietary and physical activity variables in a group of 169 postmenopausal women enrolled in a clinical trial prior to any intervention. As expected, a strong negative correlation between PBD and BMI was observed (Rho = −0.5, p < 5e−12). In contrast, we observed a strong, previously not well established, positive correlation of BMI with ABD (Rho = 0.41, p < 2.5e−8), which supports the use of ABD as a more accurate indicator of BCR. Correction of PBD by BMI did not frequently provide the same information as ABD. In addition, because of the strong influence of BMI on ABD, many correlations between dietary variables and ABD did not emerge, until adjustment was made for BMI. ABD corrected by BMI should be the gold standard BD measurement. These findings identify the optimal measurement of BD when testing the influence of an intervention on BD as a biomarker of BCR.
KeywordsPercent versus absolute breast density Breast density and BMI Dietary variables and breast density Physical activity and breast density
This work is supported by Grant KG081632 from Susan G. Komen for the Cure.
Conflict of interest
None of the authors have any conflict of interest to disclose.
- 5.Atkinson C, Warren R, Bingham SA, Day NE (1999) Mammographic patterns as a predictive biomarker of breast cancer risk: effect of tamoxifen. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 8(10):863–866Google Scholar
- 8.Kim J, Han W, Moon HG, Ahn SK, Shin HC, You JM, Han SW, Im SA, Kim TY, Koo HR, Chang JM, Cho N, Moon WK, Noh DY (2012) Breast density change as a predictive surrogate for response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in hormone receptor positive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 14(4):R102. doi: 10.1186/bcr3221 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Boyd N, Martin L, Gunasekara A, Melnichouk O, Maudsley G, Peressotti C, Yaffe M, Minkin S (2009) Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: evaluation of a novel method of measuring breast tissue volumes. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 18(6):1754–1762. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Woolcott CG, Courneya KS, Boyd NF, Yaffe MJ, Terry T, McTiernan A, Brant R, Ballard-Barbash R, Irwin ML, Jones CA, Brar S, Campbell KL, McNeely ML, Karvinen KH, Friedenreich CM (2010) Mammographic density change with 1 year of aerobic exercise among postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 19(4):1112–1121. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-09-0801 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 17.Irwin ML, Aiello EJ, McTiernan A, Bernstein L, Gilliland FD, Baumgartner RN, Baumgartner KB, Ballard-Barbash R (2007) Physical activity, body mass index, and mammographic density in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors. J Clin Oncol 25(9):1061–1066. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.3965 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Sun X, Gierach GL, Sandhu R, Williams T, Midkiff BR, Lissowska J, Wesolowska E, Boyd NF, Johnson NB, Figueroa JD, Sherman ME, Troester MA (2013) Relationship of mammographic density and gene expression: analysis of normal breast tissue surrounding breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 19(18):4972–4982. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0029 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Signori C, DuBrock C, Richie JP, Prokopczyk B, Demers LM, Hamilton C, Hartman TJ, Liao J, El-Bayoumy K, Manni A (2012) Administration of omega-3 fatty acids and Raloxifene to women at high risk of breast cancer: interim feasibility and biomarkers analysis from a clinical trial. Eur J Clin Nutr 66(8):878–884. doi: 10.1038/ejcn.2012.60 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Subar AF, Thompson FE, Kipnis V, Midthune D, Hurwitz P, McNutt S, McIntosh A, Rosenfeld S (2001) Comparative validation of the Block, Willett, and National Cancer Institute food frequency questionnaires : the Eating at America’s Table Study. Am J Epidemiol 154(12):1089–1099PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Miller PE, Lazarus P, Lesko SM, Muscat JE, Harper G, Cross AJ, Sinha R, Ryczak K, Escobar G, Mauger DT, Hartman TJ (2010) Diet index-based and empirically derived dietary patterns are associated with colorectal cancer risk. J Nutr 140(7):1267–1273. doi: 10.3945/jn.110.121780 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Craig CL, Marshall AL, Sjostrom M, Bauman AE, Booth ML, Ainsworth BE, Pratt M, Ekelund U, Yngve A, Sallis JF, Oja P (2003) International physical activity questionnaire: 12-country reliability and validity. Med Sci Sports Exerc 35(8):1381–1395. doi: 10.1249/01.MSS.0000078924.61453.FB PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Redondo A, Comas M, Macia F, Ferrer F, Murta-Nascimento C, Maristany MT, Molins E, Sala M, Castells X (2012) Inter- and intraradiologist variability in the BI-RADS assessment and breast density categories for screening mammograms. Br J Radiol 85(1019):1465–1470. doi: 10.1259/bjr/21256379 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Kleinbaum DG, Kupper LL, Muller KE, Nizam A (1997) Applied regression analysis and multivariable methods. Duxbury Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 31.Willet W (2013) Implications of total energy intake for epidemiologic analyses. In: Willet W (ed) Nutritional epidemiology, 3rd edn. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- 33.Masala G, Assedi M, Ambrogetti D, Sera F, Salvini S, Bendinelli B, Ermini I, Giorgi D, Rosselli del Turco M, Palli D (2009) Physical activity and mammographic breast density in a Mediterranean population: the EPIC Florence longitudinal study. Int J Cancer 124(7):1654–1661. doi: 10.1002/ijc.24099 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 34.Gram IT, Funkhouser E, Tabar L (1999) Moderate physical activity in relation to mammographic patterns. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 8(2):117–122Google Scholar
- 37.Suijkerbuijk KP, Van Duijnhoven FJ, Van Gils CH, Van Noord PA, Peeters PH, Friedenreich CM, Monninkhof EM (2006) Physical activity in relation to mammographic density in the Dutch prospect–European prospective investigation into cancer and nutrition cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 15(3):456–460. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0569 CrossRefGoogle Scholar