Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24188089›Full record

SynthesisBreast cancer research : BCR2013

Mammographic density and risk of breast cancer by age and tumor characteristics.

Kimberly A Bertrand, Rulla M Tamimi, Christopher G Scott, Matthew R Jensen, V Pankratz, Daniel Visscher, Aaron Norman, Fergus Couch, John Shepherd, Bo Fan and 6 more

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 95 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
95citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
12.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

95 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 185 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Breast Density Analysis Using Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  20. Article

35 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Kimberly A Bertrand
Rulla M Tamimi
Christopher G Scott
Matthew R Jensen
V Pankratz
Daniel Visscher
Aaron Norman
Fergus Couch
John Shepherd
Bo Fan
Yunn-Yi Chen
Lin Ma
Andrew H Beck
Steven R Cummings
Karla Kerlikowske
Celine M Vachon
Mayo Clinic · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USHarvard University · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USCalifornia Pacific Medical Center · US

Funding

Women's Cancer ProgramP30CA015083 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI AKHILESH PANDEY · 1985 to 2026
$151.3M
Statistical MethodsP01CA087969 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI ROSNER, BERNARD A · 2000 to 2019
$77.8M
The Role of CHFR in Tumorigenesis and Paclitaxel-Sensitivity in Breast CancerP50CA116201 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI Fergus Joseph Couch · 2005 to 2026
$49.9M
Tissue and Outcomes CoreP50CA058207 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI BLACKBURN, ELIZABETH H · 1992 to 2012
$32.7M
Risk Factors for Breast Cancer in Younger NursesR01CA050385 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI ELIASSEN, A. HEATHER, WILLETT, WALTER C. · 1989 to 2019
$32.3M
Nutritional Epidemiology of Cancer Education and Career Development ProgramR25CA098566 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY (SCH OF PUBLIC HLTH) · PI STAMPFER, MEIR · 2003 to 2013
$4.5M
Lesion Composition and Quantitative Imaging Analysis on Breast Cancer DiagnosisR01CA166945 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA · PI GIGER, MARYELLEN L., SHEPHERD, JOHN ALAN · 2013 to 2017
$3.3M
A Mayo Cohort Study of Mammographic Breast DensityR01CA097396 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI VACHON, CELINE M · 2003 to 2007
$3.1M
Genetic epidemiology of cell division regulation in breast cancerR01CA122340 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI COUCH, FERGUS JOSEPH · 2007 to 2011
$3.0M
Identifying Genes for Mammographic Breast DensityR01CA128931 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI VACHON, CELINE M · 2008 to 2012
$2.7M
Risk factors for breast cancer molecular subtypesR01CA140286 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI KERLIKOWSKE, KARLA M, VACHON, CELINE M · 2010 to 2014
$2.6M
Whole Genome Association Study of Mammographic DensityR01CA131332 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI TAMIMI, RULLA M · 2009 to 2012
$1.9M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA087969NCI NIH HHS P30 CA015083NCI NIH HHS P50 CA116201NCI NIH HHS P50 CA58207NCI NIH HHS R01 CA050385NCI NIH HHS R01 CA097396NCI NIH HHS R01 CA 122340NCI NIH HHS R01 CA122340NCI NIH HHS R01 CA124865NCI NIH HHS R01 CA128931NCI NIH HHS R01 CA131332NCI NIH HHS R01 CA140286NCI NIH HHS R01 CA166945NCI NIH HHS R01 CA97396NCI NIH HHS R25 CA098566
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionUnderstanding 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.

methodsData 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).

resultsMD 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.

conclusionMD 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.

Indexed as

AgedAge FactorsBiomarkers, TumorBreast DensityBreast NeoplasmsCarcinoma, Intraductal, NoninfiltratingCase-Control StudiesErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsLymph NodesMammary Glands, HumanMiddle AgedRadiographyReceptors, EstrogenBiomarkers, TumorERBB2 protein, humanErb-b2 Receptor Tyrosine KinasesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, Progesterone

Identifiers

PMID24188089
PMCPMC3978749
OpenAlexW2131550412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.