Prediction of hormone responsiveness by mammographic parenchymal pattern in advanced primary breast cancer

A review of the influence of mammographic density on breast cancer clinical and pathological phenotype

PURPOSE

It is well established that high mammographic density (MD), when adjusted for age and body mass index, is one of the strongest known risk factors for breast cancer (BC), and also associates with higher incidence of interval cancers in screening due to the masking of early mammographic abnormalities. Increasing research is being undertaken to determine the underlying histological and biochemical determinants of MD and their consequences for BC pathogenesis, anticipating that improved mechanistic insights may lead to novel preventative or treatment interventions. At the same time, technological advances in digital and contrast mammography are such that the validity of well-established relationships needs to be re-examined in this context.

METHODS

With attention to old versus new technologies, we conducted a literature review to summarise the relationships between clinicopathologic features of BC and the density of the surrounding breast tissue on mammography, including the associations with BC biological features inclusive of subtype, and implications for the clinical disease course encompassing relapse, progression, treatment response and survival.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

There is reasonable evidence to support positive relationships between high MD (HMD) and tumour size, lymph node positivity and local relapse in the absence of radiotherapy, but not between HMD and LVI, regional relapse or distant metastasis. Conflicting data exist for associations of HMD with tumour location, grade, intrinsic subtype, receptor status, second primary incidence and survival, which need further confirmatory studies. We did not identify any relationships that did not hold up when data involving newer imaging techniques were employed in analysis.

Is mammographic density differentially associated with breast cancer according to receptor status? A meta-analysis

Mammographic density (MD) is a strong marker of breast cancer risk, but it is debated whether the association holds, and is of a similar magnitude, for different subtypes of breast cancer defined by receptor status or gene expression profiles. A literature search conducted in June 2012 was used to identify all studies that had investigated the association of MD with subtype-specific breast cancer, independent of age. 7 cohort/case-control and 12 case-only studies were included, comprising a total of >24,000 breast cancer cases. Random effects meta-analysis models were used to combine relative risks (RR) of MD with subtype-specific breast cancer for case-control studies, and in case-only studies to combine relative risk ratios (RRR) of receptor positive versus negative breast tumors. In case-control/cohort studies, relative to women in the lowest density category, women in the highest density category had 3.1-fold (95 % confidence interval [CI] 2.2, 4.2) and 3.2-fold (1.7, 5.9) increased risk of estrogen receptor positive (ER+) and ER- breast cancer, respectively. In case-only analyses, RRRs of breast tumors being ER+ versus ER- were 1.13 (95 % CI 0.89, 1.42) for medium versus minimal MD. MD remained associated with screen-detected ER+ tumors, despite the expectation of this association to be attenuated due to masking bias and overdiagnoses of ER+ tumors. In eight contributing studies, the association of MD did not differ by HER2 status. This combined evidence strengthens the importance of MD as a strong marker of overall and of subtype-specific risk, and confirms its value in overall breast cancer risk assessment and monitoring for both research and clinical purposes.

Carotenoids, vitamin A, and estrogen receptor status in breast cancer

Among patients with breast cancer, tumors that contain estrogen receptors (ER) are associated with improved survival and better response to hormone therapy than those not expressing these receptors. The purpose of these case comparison studies was to examine the relationship between carotenoids, vitamin A, and the tumor ER status in women at diagnosis of primary breast cancer. The focus of the first study was the relationship between dietary intake and ER status, and the focus of the second study was the relationship between ER status and the plasma carotenoid, retinol, and tocopherol concentrations. We evaluated tumor ER status and self-reported dietary intake in 142 women and plasma concentrations of carotenoids, retinol, and tocopherols in 149 women, at diagnosis of breast cancer, before any medical or surgical treatment. In the first study the overall odds of ER-positive status were increased in relation to number of mammograms in the past five years, number of breast-fed babies, dietary carotenoid intake, and more frequent intake of yellow and green vegetables. Overall odds of ER-positive status were decreased in relation to years of oral contraceptive use and preformed vitamin A intake. In the second study older women, women with higher plasma lutein concentration, and women not using beta-carotene supplements were more likely to be ER positive, when data were adjusted for body mass index and factors that may influence breast cancer risk or hormonal status. Significant independent relationships between plasma retinol or tocopherol concentrations and ER status were not observed. The strong and independent relationships between carotenoid intake, plasma lutein concentration, and ER status may relate to observations linking a carotenoid-rich diet with improved prognosis after diagnosis of breast cancer.