Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25761408›Full record

ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2015

Mammographic density and breast cancer risk by family history in women of white and Asian ancestry.

Gertraud Maskarinec, Kaylae L Nakamura, Christy G Woolcott, Shannon M Conroy, Celia Byrne, Chisato Nagata, Giske Ursin, Celine M Vachon

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Breast Density and Risk of Breast Cancer in Asian Women: A Meta-analysis of Observational Studies.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2016
    Pooled it
  2. Breastfeeding and breast cancer risk by receptor status--a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology · 2015
    Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Family History of Breast Cancer, Breast Density, and Breast Cancer Risk in a U.S. Breast Cancer Screening Population.Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology · 2017
    Article
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

8 authors at 8 institutions in 4 countries.

Gertraud MaskarinecUniversity of Hawaii Cancer Center, 701 Ilalo Street, Honolulu, HI, 96813, USA, gertraud@cc.hawaii.edu.
Kaylae L Nakamura
Christy G Woolcott
Shannon M Conroy
Celia Byrne
Chisato Nagata
Giske Ursin
Celine M Vachon
Cancer Registry of Norway · NODalhousie University · CAGifu University · JPMayo Clinic · USUniformed Services University of the Health Sciences · USUniversity of California, Davis · USUniversity of Hawaii Cancer CenterUniversity of Hawaii System · US

Funding

Nutritional & Behavioral Cancer Prevention in a Multiethnic PopulationR25CA090956 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA · PI MASKARINEC, GERTRAUD · 2002 to 2012
$5.1M
NESTED CASE CONTROL STUDY OF MAMMOGRAPHIC DENSITYR01CA085265 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA · PI MASKARINEC, GERTRAUD · 2000 to 2002
$728k
A pooled analysis of mammographic density and breast cancer riskR03CA135699 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT MANOA · PI MASKARINEC, GERTRAUD · 2009 to 2010
$148k
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA085265NCI NIH HHS R03 CA 135699NCI NIH HHS R03 CA135699NCI NIH HHS R25 CA090956NCI NIH HHS R25 CA 90956
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMammographic density, i.e., the radiographic appearance of the breast, is a strong predictor of breast cancer risk. To determine whether the association of breast density with breast cancer is modified by a first-degree family history of breast cancer (FHBC) in women of white and Asian ancestry, we analyzed data from four case-control studies conducted in the USA and Japan.

methodsThe study population included 1,699 breast cancer cases and 2,422 controls, of whom 45% reported white (N = 1,849) and 40% Asian (N = 1,633) ancestry. To standardize mammographic density assessment, a single observer re-read all mammograms using one type of interactive thresholding software. Logistic regression was applied to estimate odds ratios (OR) while adjusting for confounders.

resultsOverall, 496 (12%) of participants reported a FHBC, which was significantly associated with breast cancer risk in the adjusted model (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.23-1.84). There was a statistically significant interaction on a multiplicative scale between FHBC and continuous percent density (per 10 % density: p = 0.03). The OR per 10% increase in percent density was higher among women with a FHBC (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.13-1.49) than among those without a FHBC (OR 1.14; 1.09-1.20). This pattern was apparent in whites and Asians. The respective ORs were 1.45 (95% CI 1.17-1.80) versus 1.22 (95% CI 1.14-1.32) in whites, whereas the values in Asians were only 1.24 (95% CI 0.97-1.58) versus 1.09 (95% CI 1.00-1.19).

conclusionsThese findings support the hypothesis that women with a FHBC appear to have a higher risk of breast cancer associated with percent mammographic density than women without a FHBC.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAsian PeopleBreastBreast DensityBreast NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMammary Glands, HumanMammographyMiddle AgedOdds RatioRisk FactorsWhite People

Identifiers

PMID25761408
PMCPMC4372079
OpenAlexW2101844355

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.