BMC Cancer (Dec 2017)

Comparison of the association of mammographic density and clinical factors with ductal carcinoma in situ versus invasive ductal breast cancer in Korean women

  • Hyeonyoung Ko,
  • Jinyoung Shin,
  • Jeong Eon Lee,
  • Seok Jin Nam,
  • Tuong Linh Nguyen,
  • John Llewelyn Hopper,
  • Yun-Mi Song

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-017-3841-0
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 17, no. 1
pp. 1 – 9

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background In spite of the increasing incidence of in situ breast cancer, the information about the risk factors of in situ breast cancer (DCIS) is scarce as compared to the information available for invasive ductal breast cancer (IDC), with inconsistent findings regarding the difference in risk factors between DCIS and IDC. Methods We enrolled 472 women with IDC and 90 women with DCIS and 1088 controls matching for age and menopausal status. Information on risk factors was collected through self-administered questionnaire. Percent mammographic dense area (PDA), absolute mammographic dense area (ADA), and nondense area were assessed using a computer-assisted thresholding technique. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were estimated by conditional logistic regression model with adjustment for covariates. Results Later age at menarche and regular physical exercise were associated with decreased risk of IDC, whereas alcohol consumption, previous benign breast disease, and family history of breast cancer were associated with increased risk of IDC. For DCIS, previous benign breast disease and alcohol consumption were associated with the increased risk, and regular physical exercise was associated with decreased risk. Increase of ADA by 1-quartile level and PDA increase by 10% were associated with 1.10 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.21) and 1.10 (95% CI: 1.01, 1.19) times greater risk of IDC, respectively. The increase of ADA by 1-quartile level and PDA increase by 10% were associated with 1.17 (95% CI: 0.91, 1.50) times and 1.11 (95% CI:0.90,1.37) times greater risk of DCIS, respectively, but the associations were not statistically significant. There was no significant difference in the association with risk factors and mammographic density measures between IDC and DCIS (P > 0.1). Conclusions Differential associations of DCIS with mammographic density and risk factors as compared with the associations of IDC were not evident. This finding suggests that IDC and DCIS develop through the shared causal pathways.

Keywords