Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Mammographic density, parity and age at first birth, and risk of breast cancer: an analysis of four case–control studies

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Mammographic density is strongly and consistently associated with breast cancer risk. To determine if this association was modified by reproductive factors (parity and age at first birth), data were combined from four case–control studies conducted in the United States and Japan. To overcome the issue of variation in mammographic density assessment among the studies, a single observer re-read all the mammograms using one type of interactive thresholding software. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) while adjusting for other known breast cancer risk factors. Included were 1,699 breast cancer cases and 2,422 controls, 74% of whom were postmenopausal. A positive association between mammographic density and breast cancer risk was evident in every group defined by parity and age at first birth (OR per doubling of percent mammographic density ranged between 1.20 and 1.39). Nonetheless, the association appeared to be stronger among nulliparous than parous women (OR per doubling of percent mammographic density = 1.39 vs. 1.24; P interaction = 0.054). However, when examined by study location, the effect modification by parity was apparent only in women from Hawaii and when examined by menopausal status, it was apparent in postmenopausal, but not premenopausal, women. Effect modification by parity was not significant in subgroups defined by body mass index or ethnicity. Adjusting for mammographic density did not attenuate the OR for the association between parity and breast cancer risk by more than 16.4%, suggesting that mammographic density explains only a small proportion of the reduction in breast cancer risk associated with parity. In conclusion, this study did not support the hypothesis that parity modifies the breast cancer risk attributed to mammographic density. Even though an effect modification was found in Hawaiian women, no such thing was found in women from the other three locations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Bronskill M, Yaffe MJ, Duric N, Minkin S (2010) Breast tissue composition and susceptibility to breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 102(16):1224–1237

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I (2006) Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 15(6):1159–1169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Conroy SM, Woolcott CG, Byrne C, Nagata C, Ursin G, Vachon CM, Yaffe MJ, Koga K, Pagano I, Maskarinec G (2011) Mammographic density and risk of breast cancer by adiposity: an analysis of four case–control studies. Int J Cancer. doi:10.1002/ijc.26205

  4. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Sun L, Guo H, Chiarelli A, Hislop G, Yaffe M, Minkin S (2006) Body size, mammographic density and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 15(11):2086–2092

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Martin LJ, Minkin S, Boyd NF (2009) Hormone therapy, mammographic density, and breast cancer risk. Maturitas 64(1):20–26

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Li Q, Sun L, Chiarelli AM, Hislop G, Yaffe MJ, Minkin S (2006) Mammographic density as a surrogate marker for the effects of hormone therapy on risk of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 15(5):961–966

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kerlikowske K, Cook AJ, Buist DS, Cummings SR, Vachon C, Vacek P, Miglioretti DL (2010) Breast cancer risk by breast density, menopause, and postmenopausal hormone therapy use. J Clin Oncol 28(24):3830–3837

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cuzick J, Warwick J, Pinney E, Duffy SW, Cawthorn S, Howell A, Forbes JF, Warren RM (2011) Tamoxifen-induced reduction in mammographic density and breast cancer risk reduction: a nested case–control study. J Natl Cancer Inst 103(9):744–752

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. van Gils CH, Hendriks JH, Otten JD, Holland R, Verbeek AL (2000) Parity and mammographic breast density in relation to breast cancer risk: indication of interaction. Eur J Cancer Prev 9(2):105–111

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nechuta S, Paneth N, Velie EM (2010) Pregnancy characteristics and maternal breast cancer risk: a review of the epidemiologic literature. Cancer Causes Control 21(7):967–989

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Albrektsen G, Heuch I, Hansen S, Kvale G (2005) Breast cancer risk by age at birth, time since birth and time intervals between births: exploring interaction effects. Br J Cancer 92(1):167–175

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer (2002) Breast cancer and breastfeeding: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 47 epidemiological studies in 30 countries, including 50302 women with breast cancer and 96973 women without the disease. Lancet 360(9328):187–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Wu AH, Ursin G, Koh WP, Wang R, Yuan JM, Khoo KS, Yu MC (2008) Green tea, soy, and mammographic density in Singapore Chinese women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 17(12):3358–3365

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. 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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Haars G, van Noord PA, van Gils CH, Grobbee DE, Peeters PH (2005) Measurements of breast density: no ratio for a ratio. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 14(11 Pt 1):2634–2640

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Warren R, Skinner J, Sala E, Denton E, Dowsett M, Folkerd E, Healey CS, Dunning A, Doody D, Ponder B, Luben RN, Day NE, Easton D (2006) Associations among mammographic density, circulating sex hormones, and polymorphisms in sex hormone metabolism genes in postmenopausal women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 15(8):1502–1508

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Stone J, Warren RM, Pinney E, Warwick J, Cuzick J (2009) Determinants of percentage and area measures of mammographic density. Am J Epidemiol 170(12):1571–1578

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Samimi G, Colditz GA, Baer HJ, Tamimi RM (2008) Measures of energy balance and mammographic density in the Nurses’ Health Study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 109(1):113–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mackinnon DP, Fairchild AJ, Fritz MS (2007) Mediation analysis. Annu Rev Psychol 58:593–614

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Byng JW, Boyd NF, Fishell E, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ (1994) The quantitative analysis of mammographic densities. Phys Med Biol 39(10):1629–1638

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Maskarinec G, Pagano I, Lurie G, Wilkens LR, Kolonel LN (2005) Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: the multiethnic cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 162(8):743–752

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ursin G, Ma H, Wu AH, Bernstein L, Salane M, Parisky YR, Astrahan M, Siozon CC, Pike MC (2003) Mammographic density and breast cancer in three ethnic groups. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 12(4):332–338

    Google Scholar 

  23. Vachon CM, Pankratz VS, Scott CG, Maloney SD, Ghosh K, Brandt KR, Milanese T, Carston MJ, Sellers TA (2007) Longitudinal trends in mammographic percent density and breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 16(5):921–928

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Nagata C, Matsubara T, Fujita H, Nagao Y, Shibuya C, Kashiki Y, Shimizu H (2005) Mammographic density and the risk of breast cancer in Japanese women. Br J Cancer 92(12):2102–2106

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Byng JW, Boyd NF, Little L, Lockwood G, Fishell E, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ (1996) Symmetry of projection in the quantitative analysis of mammographic images. Eur J Cancer Prev 5(5):319–327

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Desquilbet L, Mariotti F (2010) Dose–response analyses using restricted cubic spline functions in public health research. Stat Med 29(9):1037–1057

    Google Scholar 

  27. Szklo M, Nieto FJ (2000) Epidemiology: beyond the basics. Aspen Publishers, Gaithersburg

    Google Scholar 

  28. Russo J, Hu YF, Yang X, Russo IH (2000) Developmental, cellular, and molecular basis of human breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2000(27):17–37

  29. Li T, Sun L, Miller N, Nicklee T, Woo J, Hulse-Smith L, Tsao MS, Khokha R, Martin L, Boyd N (2005) The association of measured breast tissue characteristics with mammographic density and other risk factors for breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 14(2):343–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Balogh GA, Heulings R, Mailo DA, Russo PA, Sheriff F, Russo IH, Moral R, Russo J (2006) Genomic signature induced by pregnancy in the human breast. Int J Oncol 28(2):399–410

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Medina D (2005) Mammary developmental fate and breast cancer risk. Endocr Relat Cancer 12(3):483–495

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Tamburrini AL, Woolcott CG, Boyd NF, Yaffe MJ, Terry T, Yasui Y, Jones CA, Patten SB, Courneya KS, Friedenreich CM (2010) Associations between mammographic density and serum and dietary cholesterol. Breast Cancer Res Treat 125(1):181–189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Hafeman D (2009) “Proportion explained”: a causal interpretation for standard measures of indirect effect. Am J Epidemiol 170(11):1443–1448

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Vacek PM, Geller BM (2004) A prospective study of breast cancer risk using routine mammographic breast density measurements. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 13(5):715–722

    Google Scholar 

  35. Jakes RW, Duffy SW, Ng FC, Gao F, Ng EH (2000) Mammographic parenchymal patterns and risk of breast cancer at and after a prevalence screen in Singaporean women. Int J Epidemiol 29(1):11–19

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Tice JA, Cummings SR, Ziv E, Kerlikowske K (2005) Mammographic breast density and the Gail model for breast cancer risk prediction in a screening population. Breast Cancer Res Treat 94(2):115–122

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Ma H, Luo J, Press MF, Wang Y, Bernstein L, Ursin G (2009) Is there a difference in the association between percent mammographic density and subtypes of breast cancer? Luminal A and triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 18(2):479–485

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ma H, Bernstein L, Pike MC, Ursin G (2006) Reproductive factors and breast cancer risk according to joint estrogen and progesterone receptor status: a meta-analysis of epidemiological studies. Breast Cancer Res 8(4):R43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Yang XR, Chang-Claude J, Goode EL, Couch FJ, Nevanlinna H, Milne RL et al (2011) Associations of breast cancer risk factors with tumor subtypes: a pooled analysis from the Breast Cancer Association Consortium studies. J Natl Cancer Inst 103(3):250–263

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Dearth RK, Delgado DA, Hiney JK, Pathiraja T, Oesterreich S, Medina D, Dees WL, Lee AV (2010) Parity-induced decrease in systemic growth hormone alters mammary gland signaling: a potential role in pregnancy protection from breast cancer. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 3(3):312–321

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Schedin P (2006) Pregnancy-associated breast cancer and metastasis. Nat Rev Cancer 6(4):281–291

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Ghosh K, Brandt KR, Reynolds CA (2009) Histologic markers of mammographic breast density: core-needle biopsy tissue from healthy volunteers. Cancer Res 69(Suppl 2):263S

    Google Scholar 

  43. Wiseman BS, Werb Z (2002) Stromal effects on mammary gland development and breast cancer. Science 296(5570):1046–1049

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Passaperuma K, Warner E, Hill KA, Gunasekara A, Yaffe MJ (2010) Is mammographic breast density a breast cancer risk factor in women with BRCA mutations? J Clin Oncol 28(23):3779–3783

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Kotsuma Y, Tamaki Y, Nishimura T, Tsubai M, Ueda S, Shimazu K, Jin Kim S, Miyoshi Y, Tanji Y, Taguchi T, Noguchi S (2007) Quantitative assessment of mammographic density and breast cancer risk for Japanese women. Breast 17(1):27–35

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Duffy SW, Jakes RW, Ng FC, Gao F (2004) Interaction of dense breast patterns with other breast cancer risk factors in a case–control study. Br J Cancer 91(2):233–236

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Tice JA, Cummings SR, Smith-Bindman R, Ichikawa L, Barlow WE, Kerlikowske K (2008) Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model. Ann Intern Med 148(5):337–347

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Chen J, Pee D, Ayyagari R, Graubard B, Schairer C, Byrne C, Benichou J, Gail MH (2006) Projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk in white women with a model that includes mammographic density. J Natl Cancer Inst 98(17):1215–1226

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the National Cancer Institute, the US Department of Health and Human Services, grant number R03 CA 135699. CGW and SMC were supported for the completion of the study on this project through postdoctoral fellowships on grant number R25 CA 90956.

Conflict of Interest

Dr. Martin Yaffe is one of the founders of Matakina Technology, a manufacturer of software for the assessment of mammographic density. However, the software was not used in the present research, and neither the results nor the way the research was conducted has been influenced by Dr. Yaffe’s involvement in Matakina Technology.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Obstetrics & Gynaecology and Pediatrics, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

    Christy G. Woolcott

  2. University of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, HI, USA

    Karin Koga, Shannon M. Conroy, Ian Pagano & Gertraud Maskarinec

  3. Georgetown Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, USA

    Celia Byrne

  4. Gifu University Graduate School of Medicine, Gifu, Japan

    Chisato Nagata

  5. University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Giske Ursin

  6. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Celine M. Vachon

  7. Sunnybrook Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Martin J. Yaffe

Authors
  1. Christy G. Woolcott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Karin Koga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Shannon M. Conroy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Celia Byrne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Chisato Nagata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Giske Ursin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Celine M. Vachon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Martin J. Yaffe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Ian Pagano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Gertraud Maskarinec
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christy G. Woolcott.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Woolcott, C.G., Koga, K., Conroy, S.M. et al. Mammographic density, parity and age at first birth, and risk of breast cancer: an analysis of four case–control studies. Breast Cancer Res Treat 132, 1163–1171 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1929-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-011-1929-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation