Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26335607›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2015

Postmenopausal mammographic breast density and subsequent breast cancer risk according to selected tissue markers.

Lusine Yaghjyan, Andreas Pettersson, Graham A Colditz, Laura C Collins, Stuart J Schnitt, Andrew H Beck, Bernard Rosner, Celine Vachon, Rulla M Tamimi

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A systematic review of the assessment model for palliative care needs in cancer patients.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Lusine YaghjyanDepartment of Epidemiology, College of Public Health and Health Professions and College of Medicine, University of Florida, 2004 Mowry Road, Gainesville, FL 32610, USA.
Andreas PetterssonDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, 181 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Graham A ColditzDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University in St Louis School of Medicine, 660S. Euclid Avenue, St Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Laura C CollinsDepartment of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Stuart J SchnittDepartment of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Andrew H BeckDepartment of Pathology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Harvard Medical School, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Bernard RosnerChanning Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, 181 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Celine VachonDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Charlton 6-239, 200 First Street Southwest, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Rulla M TamimiDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, 181 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Harvard University · USBeth Israel Deaconess Medical Center · USMayo Clinic · USUniversity of Florida Health · USWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Statistical MethodsP01CA087969 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI ROSNER, BERNARD A · 2000 to 2019
$77.8M
Long Term Multidisciplinary Study of Cancer in Women: The Nurses Health StudyUM1CA186107 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI ELIASSEN, A. HEATHER, STAMPFER, MEIR · 2014 to 2023
$22.3M
Life Course Cancer Epidemiology Cohort in WomenUM1CA176726 · NCI · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI WILLETT, WALTER C. · 2013 to 2017
$15.7M
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
The Role of Sphingosine Kinase in Glioblastoma Stem CellsR21CA124685 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI VAN BROCKLYN, JAMES R · 2008 to 2009
$371k
NCI NIH HHS CA087969NCI NIH HHS CA124685NCI NIH HHS CA131332NCI NIH HHS P01 CA087969NCI NIH HHS R01 CA131332NCI NIH HHS R01 CA140286NCI NIH HHS R21 CA124685NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA176726NCI NIH HHS UM1CA176726NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA186107NCI NIH HHS UM1CA186107
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study aimed to determine if associations of pre-diagnostic percent breast density, absolute dense area, and non-dense area with subsequent breast cancer risk differ by the tumour's molecular marker status.

methodsWe included 1010 postmenopausal women with breast cancer and 2077 matched controls from the Nurses' Health Study (NHS) and the Nurses' Health Study II (NHS II) cohorts. Breast density was estimated from digitised film mammograms using computer-assisted thresholding techniques. Information on breast cancer risk factors was obtained prospectively from biennial questionnaires. Polychotomous logistic regression was used to assess associations of breast density measures with tumour subtypes by the status of selected tissue markers. All tests of statistical significance were two sided.

resultsThe association of percent density with breast cancer risk appeared to be stronger in ER- as compared with ER+ tumours, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (density ⩾50% vs <10% odds ratio (OR)=3.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.17-4.32 for ER+; OR=4.61, 95% CI 2.36-9.03 for ER-, Pheterogeneity=0.08). Stronger positive associations were found for absolute dense area and CK5/6- and EGFR- as compared with respective marker-positive tumours (Pheterogeneity=0.002 and 0.001, respectively). Stronger inverse associations of non-dense area with breast cancer risk were found for ER- as compared with ER+ tumours (Pheterogeneity=0.0001) and for AR+, CK5/6+, and EGFR+ as compared with respective marker-negative tumours (Pheterogeneity=0.03, 0.005, and 0.009, respectively). The associations of density measures with breast cancer did not differ by progesterone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status.

conclusionsBreast density influences the risk of breast cancer subtypes by potentially different mechanisms.

Indexed as

AdultBiomarkers, TumorBreast DensityBreast NeoplasmsCase-Control StudiesErbB ReceptorsFemaleHumansMammary Glands, HumanMiddle AgedPostmenopauseProspective StudiesReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, ProgesteroneRisk FactorsBiomarkers, TumorEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsReceptors, EstrogenReceptors, Progesterone

Identifiers

PMID26335607
PMCPMC4651128
OpenAlexW1219746990

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.