Skip Navigation


American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access originally published online on April 2, 2008
American Journal of Epidemiology 2008 167(9):1027-1036; doi:10.1093/aje/kwn063
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
167/9/1027    most recent
kwn063v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Related articles in Am. J. Epidemiol.
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (1)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kelemen, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Vachon, C. M.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kelemen, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Vachon, C. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

American Journal of Epidemiology © The Author 2008. Published by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTIONS

Age-specific Trends in Mammographic Density

The Minnesota Breast Cancer Family Study

Linda E. Kelemen1, V. Shane Pankratz1, Thomas A. Sellers2, Kathy R. Brandt3, Alice Wang1, Carol Janney1, Zachary S. Fredericksen1, James R. Cerhan1 and Celine M. Vachon1

1 Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN
2 Division of Cancer Prevention and Control, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL
3 Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, MN

Correspondence to Dr. Celine M. Vachon, Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Charlton 6-239, Rochester, MN 55905 (e-mail: vachon.celine{at}mayo.edu).

Received for publication December 19, 2006. Accepted for publication July 30, 2007.

Mammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer, yet few studies have evaluated density trends, and associated factors, over time. The authors retrieved and digitized mammograms (≥1 per woman) imaged in 1990–2003 to evaluate percent density (PD) in the Minnesota Breast Cancer Family cohort. Multivariable-adjusted, mixed-effects, repeated-measures models incorporating a natural cubic spline provided estimates of nonlinear trends in PD with age and were used to examine association with covariates. Overall, 5,698 mammograms from 1,689 women with covariate information were digitized. In descriptive analyses, the highest median PD was 33.1% (interquartile range, 21.8%; n = 230) among premenopausal women, 31.0% (interquartile range, 23.2%; n = 175) among women who transitioned from pre- to postmenopause, and 18.7% (interquartile range, 22.2%; n = 1,284) among postmenopausal women. On average, premenopausal compared with postmenopausal women had 1.9% (p = 0.001) higher PD. In repeated-measures analyses, greater declines in PD occurred with menopause and among women with higher baseline PD; current postmenopausal hormone use and higher body mass index modified these declines (p interaction < 0.001). No significant modification of the density change with age was seen with parity/age at first birth, age at menarche, oral contraceptive use, family history of breast or ovarian cancer in a first- or second-degree relative, educational level, smoking status, or alcohol intake were observed. These data suggest that menopause, baseline PD, postmenopausal hormone use, and body mass index predict changes in mammographic density trends during adult life.

breast; mammography; postmenopause; premenopause; radiographic image interpretation, computer-assisted; risk factors


Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; FU1, first follow-up questionnaire; FU2, second follow-up questionnaire; PMH, postmenopausal hormone


Editor's note: An invited commentary on this article is published on page 1037.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?

Related articles in Am. J. Epidemiol.:

Invited Commentary: Assessing Breast Density Change—Lessons for Future Studies
Celia Byrne
Am. J. Epidemiol. 2008 167: 1037-1040. [Abstract] [FREE Full Text]  



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
C. Byrne
Invited Commentary: Assessing Breast Density Change--Lessons for Future Studies
Am. J. Epidemiol., May 1, 2008; 167(9): 1037 - 1040.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.