Breast Cancer in Dense Breasts: Detection Challenges and Supplemental Screening Opportunities

Dense breast tissue at mammography is associated with higher breast cancer incidence and mortality rates, which have prompted new considerations for breast cancer screening in women with dense breasts. The authors review the definition and classification of breast density, density assessment methods, breast cancer risk, current legislation, and future efforts and summarize trials and key studies that have affected the existing guidelines for supplemental screening. Cases of breast cancer in dense breasts are presented, highlighting a variety of modalities and specific imaging findings that can aid in cancer detection and staging. Understanding the current state of breast cancer screening in patients with dense breasts and its challenges is important to shape future considerations for care. Shifting the paradigm of breast cancer detection toward early diagnosis for women with dense breasts may be the answer to reducing the number of deaths from this common disease. ©RSNA, 2023 Online supplemental material is available for this article. Quiz questions for this article are available through the Online Learning Center. See the invited commentary by Yeh in this issue.

The association between mammographic density and breast cancer molecular subtypes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the whether high mammographic density (MD) is differentially associated with all subtypes of breast cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched systematically in October 2022 to include all studies that investigated the association between MD and breast cancer subtype. Aggregate data of 17,193 breast cancer cases from 23 studies were selected, including five cohort/case-control and 18 case-only studies. The relative risk (RR) of MD were combined using random/fixed effects models for case-control studies, and for case-only studies, relative risk ratios (RRRs) were a combination of luminal A, luminal B, and HER2-positive versus triple-negative tumours.

RESULTS

Women in the highest density category in case-control/cohort studies had a 2.24-fold (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.53, 3.28), 1.81-fold (95% CI 1.15, 2.85), 1.44-fold (95% CI 1.14, 1.81), and 1.59-fold (95% CI 0.89, 2.85) higher risk of triple-negative, HER-2 (human epidermal growth factor receptor 2) positive, luminal A, and luminal B breast cancer compared to women in the lowest density category. RRRs for breast tumours being luminal A, luminal B, and HER-2 positive versus triple-negative in case-only studies were 1.62 (95% CI 1.14, 2.31), 1.81 (95% CI 1.22, 2.71) and 2.58 (95% CI 1.63, 4.08), respectively, for BIRADS 4 versus BIRADS 1.

CONCLUSION

The evidence indicates MD is a potent risk factor for the majority of breast cancer subtypes to different degrees. Increased MD is more strongly linked to HER-2-positive cancers compared to other breast cancer subtypes. The application of MD as a subtype-specific risk marker may facilitate the creation of personalised risk prediction models and screening procedures.

Evaluation of volumetric breast density as a risk factor for breast carcinoma in pre- and postmenopausal women, its association with hormone receptor status and breast carcinoma subtypes defined by histology and tumor markers

Background

Mammographic breast density is acknowledged as an independent risk factor for breast cancer. Its association with different pathological types and tumors markers is still under evaluation. This study aims to assess the associations of volumetric density grades (VDG) with breast cancer risk in premenopausal and postmenopausal age groups separately. We also aim to assess the association of VDG with hormone receptor status and breast cancer subtypes defined by histology and tumor markers (ER, PR, Her 2-neu and Ki 67).

Results

This retrospective study was done with inclusion of two comparable groups of 185 breast cancer cases and 244 healthy controls. These groups were further divided into pre‑ and postmenopausal subgroups. Mammograms of the cases and controls were evaluated by fully automated volumetric breast density software-VOLPARA and classified into four VDG. The hormone receptor status and breast cancer subtypes defined by histological features and tumor markers in the various VDG were also evaluated. The risk of developing carcinoma was significantly higher in women with high-density breasts (VDG-c + VDG-d) as compared with low-density breasts (VDG-a + VDG-b) in both premenopausal and postmenopausal subgroups. No significant difference was seen in the histopathological characteristics of breast cancer among various VDG.

Conclusions

Our study suggests positive association between high VDG and risk of cancer in both premenopausal and postmenopausal group of Indian women. The hormone receptor status and breast cancer subtypes defined by histology and tumor markers did not reveal any relation to the grades of breast density.

Comparison of Cancers Detected by Screening Breast Ultrasound and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis

PURPOSE

Review of outcomes of screening patients imaged with both digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and screening ultrasound (US) to compare the cancer detection rates and characteristics of cancers detected by the imaging modalities.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective study reviewed a total of 24,787 screening US exams performed in the time period of January 2013 through December 2017. These exams were in patients with heterogeneously dense or extremely dense breast tissue. In this population, 21,220 (86%) had DBT screening mammography. These cases were further reviewed to identify any pathology-proven malignancy detected with US and/or DBT.

RESULTS

The study cohort consisted of 115 breast cancers in patients having screening US and DBT. Of the 115 cancers, 100 were invasive cancers and 15 were ductal carcinoma in situ: 64/115 were seen on DBT, 9 of which were seen only on DBT, and 106 were seen on US, with 51 seen only on US. The cancer detection rate of DBT only was 0.4/1000 (9/21,220) and 3.0/1000 (64/21,220) for those detected on DBT whether with or without additional US, with detection on US only having an incremental cancer detection rate of 2.4/1000 (51/21,220) above DBT detected malignancies. Differences in DBT-detected lesions and US only lesions when comparing median lesion size, lesion type, tumor type (invasive vs noninvasive) and tumor stage were statistically significant (p = 0.0045, p = 0.0113, p = 0.0003, and p = 0.0153, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In review of the outcomes of a screening US program, we found a similar number of breast cancers were detected by DBT and US, and US alone (47.8% vs 44.3%, respectively). Ninety-six percent of the cancers detected by US alone were invasive; 89% of those seen on both modalities were invasive, while most of the breast cancers seen on DBT only were in situ carcinoma. Statistically significant differences between DBT and US, and US alone were found for many lesion characteristics including lesion size, type, tumor size, and tumor stage.

Quantitative Mammographic Density Measurements and Molecular Subtypes in Chinese Women With Breast Cancer

Background

Studies investigating associations between mammographic density (MD) and breast cancer subtypes have generated mixed results. We previously showed that having extremely dense breasts was associated with the human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-enriched subtype in Chinese breast cancer patients.

Methods

In this study, we reevaluated the MD-subtype association in 1549 Chinese breast cancer patients, using VolparaDensity software to obtain quantitative MD measures. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

Results

Compared with women with luminal A tumors, women with luminal B/HER2- (odds ratio [OR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.04 to 1.38; P = .01), luminal B/HER2+ (OR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.03 to 1.46; P = .03), and HER2-enriched tumors (OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.59; P = .01) had higher fibroglandular dense volume. These associations were stronger in patients with smaller tumors (<2 cm). In contrast, the triple-negative subtype was associated with lower nondense volume (OR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.68 to 0.99; P = .04), and the association was only seen among older women (age 50 years or older).

Conclusion

Although biological mechanisms remain to be investigated, the associations for the HER2-enriched and luminal B subtypes with increasing MD may partially explain the higher prevalence of luminal B and HER2+ breast cancers previously reported in Asian women.

Optimization of prediction methods for risk assessment of pathogenic germline variants in the Japanese population

Predicting pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) in breast cancer patients is important for selecting optimal therapeutics and implementing risk reduction strategies. However, PGV risk factors and the performance of prediction methods in the Japanese population remain unclear. We investigated clinicopathological risk factors using the Tyrer‐Cuzick (TC) breast cancer risk evaluation tool to predict BRCA PGVs in unselected Japanese breast cancer patients (n = 1,995). Eleven breast cancer susceptibility genes were analyzed using target‐capture sequencing in a previous study; the PGV prevalence in BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 was 0.75%, 3.1%, and 0.45%, respectively. Significant associations were found between the presence of BRCA PGVs and early disease onset, number of familial cancer cases (up to third‐degree relatives), triple‐negative breast cancer patients under the age of 60, and ovarian cancer history (all P < .0001). In total, 816 patients (40.9%) satisfied the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for recommending multigene testing. The sensitivity and specificity of the NCCN criteria for discriminating PGV carriers from noncarriers were 71.3% and 60.7%, respectively. The TC model showed good discrimination for predicting BRCA PGVs (area under the curve, 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.69‐0.81). Furthermore, use of the TC model with an optimized cutoff of TC score ≥0.16% in addition to the NCCN guidelines improved the predictive efficiency for high‐risk groups (sensitivity, 77.2%; specificity, 54.8%; about 11 genes). Given the influence of ethnic differences on prediction, we consider that further studies are warranted to elucidate the role of environmental and genetic factors for realizing precise prediction.

Mammographic breast density and characteristics of invasive breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Inconclusive data exist on the association between breast density and breast cancer characteristics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a case-only study on 667 invasive breast cancers, using data from the Piedmont Cancer Registry. We applied a multivariate logistic regression model to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of high breast density (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS 3-4) versus low (BI-RADS 1-2) in relation to histologic grade, pathological tumour size and lymph node status, histotype, estrogen and progesterone receptor, HER2 and Ki67 status. Histopathological data were assessed according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging Manual guidelines. The model includes terms for age at diagnosis, education level, body mass index, reproductive factors, family history of breast cancer, smoking and diabetes.

RESULTS

As regards histologic grade, compared to well differentiated tumours, the OR of high (versus low) breast density cases was 0.61 (95% CI 0.38-0.98) for moderately-poorly differentiated tumours. No other associations with hormonal and histopathological characteristics were observed.

DISCUSSION

Our results indicate that low breast density is associated with moderately-poorly differentiated breast tumours.

The impact of selected risk factors among breast cancer molecular subtypes: a case-only study

PURPOSE

Breast cancer (BC) risk factors have been differentially associated with BC subtypes, but quantification is still undefined. Therefore, we compared selected risk factors with BC subtypes, using a case-case approach.

METHODS

We retrieved 1321 invasive female BCs from the Piedmont Cancer Registry. Through record linkage of clinical records, we obtained data on estrogen (Er) and progesterone (Pr) receptors, Ki67 and HER2+ status, BC family history, breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) density, reproductive risk factors and education. We defined BC subtypes as follows : luminal A (Er+ and/or Pr+ , HER2- , low Ki67), luminal BH- (Er+ and/or Pr + , HER2- , Ki67 high), luminal BH+ (Er+ and/or Pr + , HER2+), HER2+ (Er - , Pr - , HER2+), ) and triple negative (Er - , Pr - , HER2-). Using a multinomial regression model, we estimated the odds ratios (ORs) for selected BC risk factors considering luminal A as reference.

RESULTS

For triple negative, the OR for BC family history was 1.83 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-2.97). Compared to BI-RADS 1, for triple negative, the OR for BI-RADS 2 was 0.56 (95% CI 0.27-1.14) and for BI-RADS 3-4 was 0.37 (95% CI 0.15-0.88); for luminal BH +, the OR for BI-RADS 2 was 2.36 (95% CI 1.08-5.11). For triple negative, the OR for high education was 1.78 (95% CI 1.03-3.07), and for late menarche, the OR was 1.69 (95% CI 1.02-2.81). For luminal BH + , the OR for parous women was 0.56 (95% CI 0.34-0.92).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supported BC etiologic heterogeneity across subtypes, particularly for triple negative.

Molecular Breast Imaging in Clinical Practice

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this article is to review clinical uses and image interpretation of molecular breast imaging (MBI) and clarify radiation risks. CONCLUSION. MBI detects additional cancers compared with conventional imaging in women with dense breasts and those with elevated risk of breast cancer. Its role as an imaging biomarker of cancer risk and in assessing neoadjuvant chemotherapy response is growing. Radiation risk is minimal; benefit-to-risk ratio is similar to that of mammography. MBI is low cost, well tolerated, and easily adapted into clinical practice.

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.

Association between mammographic density and tumor marker-defined breast cancer subtypes: a case-control study

High mammographic density (MD) is the most important risk factor for breast cancer. This study aimed to clarify the relationship between MD and breast cancer subtypes defined by tumor markers. We enrolled 642 women with breast cancer (69% premenopausal) and 1241 controls matched for age and menopausal status. Absolute mammographic dense area (ADA), percent mammographic dense area (PDA), and nondense area were assessed using a computer-assisted thresholding technique. We classified breast cancer cases into four subtypes using information on tumor marker expression such as estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and Cerb2 receptor (HER2); luminal A (ER+ and/or PR+, HER2-), luminal B (ER+ and/or PR+, HER2+), HER2-overexpressing (ER-, PR-, and HER2+), and triple-negative (ER-, PR-, and HER2-). Analysis was carried out using a conditional logistic regression model with adjustment for covariates. ADA and PDA were associated positively with the risk of breast cancer overall. Both ADA and PDA tended to have a positive association with breast cancer with any ER, any PR, or HER2-, but not for HER2+. The risk of luminal A breast cancer increased significantly 1.11 times (95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.23) for ADA and 1.12 times (95% confidence interval: 1.01-1.24) for PDA, estimated per 1 SD of the age and BMI-adjusted MD. However, the risk of breast cancer with luminal B, HER2-overexpressing, and triple-negative subtypes did not differ (P>0.10). Differential associations between MD measures and breast cancer by tumor marker status or tumor marker-defined subtypes were not detected. These findings suggested that the association between MD and breast cancer subtype may be because of other causal pathways.

Detection of a Mammographically Occult Breast Cancer with a Challenging Clinical History

Screening mammography has helped to identify countless incidences of breast cancer since its adoption in the 1960s. Over time, the screening guidelines and techniques have been refined to better detect malignancies and to avoid false positive results. However, weaknesses remain in mammography and represent an opportunity for improvement. The interference of natural breast tissue and glands can obscure the presence of occult breast malignancies. Additionally, the inability to differentiate breast tissue on the basis of depth, and the compounding of breast densities that occurs as a consequence of two-dimensional imaging, are setbacks when it comes to relying on mammography. User error and bias can also misguide the proper detection of underlying cancers during the radiological interpretation process. The following case represents a combination of these factors and others that culminated in a missed diagnosis of invasive ductal carcinoma in a young woman suffering from mastitis of the contralateral breast.

Are you dense? The implications and imaging of the dense breast

Mammography relies on a visual interpretation of imaging results that is often confounded by dense breast tissue. Dense tissue affects the ability and accuracy with which the radiologist is able to detect cancer. Dense tissue may mask the presence of a breast cancer, and breast density is well recognised as an independent risk factor for the development of breast cancer. In the dense breast, detected cancers tend to be larger, more often lymph node positive and of a higher stage than those diagnosed in fatty tissue. The incidence of tumour multifocality and multicentricity is higher, decreasing the chances for breast conserving treatment. The literature convincingly supports the use of supplemental imaging modalities in women who present with increased breast density. There are clear advantages and disadvantages to each set of diagnostic imaging tests. However, there is no simple, cost-effective solution for women with dense breasts to obtain a definitive detection status through imaging. Suggestions are put forward as to what supplemental imaging choices should be included for the imaging of the dense breast with reference to the current South African setting. Use of supplemental screening modalities should be tailored to individual risk assessment. In a resource-constrained environment, international recommendations may need to be adjusted.

Breast density and impacts on health

The World Health Organization states 'Early detection in order to improve breast cancer outcome and survival remains the cornerstone of breast cancer control' [WHO (World Health Organization) (2017) Breast cancer: prevention and control Available from: http://www.who.int/cancer/detection/breastcancer/en/]. Breast Density Matters UK is a non-profit breast cancer organization. The organization's mission is to educate about breast density and its screening and risk implications with the goal of achieving the earliest stage diagnosis possible for women with dense breasts. This educational mission is endorsed by breast imaging experts worldwide [Berg WA (2015-2017) Dense Breast-info Inc Available from: http://densebreast-info.org/about.aspx].

Breast Density and Breast Cancer Incidence in the Lebanese Population: Results from a Retrospective Multicenter Study

Purpose

To study the distribution of breast mammogram density in Lebanese women and correlate it with breast cancer (BC) incidence.

Methods

Data from 1,049 women who had screening or diagnostic mammography were retrospectively reviewed. Age, menopausal status, contraceptives or hormonal replacement therapy (HRT), parity, breastfeeding, history of BC, breast mammogram density, and final BI-RADS assessment were collected. Breast density was analyzed in each age category and compared according to factors that could influence breast density and BC incidence.

Results

120 (11.4%) patients had BC personal history with radiation and/or chemotherapy; 66 patients were postmenopausal under HRT. Mean age was 52.58 ± 11.90 years. 76.4% of the patients (30–39 years) had dense breasts. Parity, age, and menopausal status were correlated to breast density whereas breastfeeding and personal/family history of BC and HRT were not. In multivariate analysis, it was shown that the risk of breast cancer significantly increases 3.3% with age (P = 0.005), 2.5 times in case of menopause (P = 0.004), and 1.4 times when breast density increases (P = 0.014).

Conclusion

Breast density distribution in Lebanon is similar to the western society. Similarly to other studies, it was shown that high breast density was statistically related to breast cancer, especially in older and menopausal women.

Correlation between sonographic findings and clinicopathologic and biologic features of pure ductal carcinoma in situ in 691 patients

OBJECTIVE

The objective of our study was to compare the sonographic features of pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) lesions with the initial clinical presentation and histopathologic findings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The images and records of 691 patients with pure DCIS who underwent preoperative mammography and whole-breast sonography as part of staging workup in a single institution from January 1, 1996, through July 31, 2009, were reviewed. The BI-RADS sonography lexicon was used when reviewing the sonographic studies. Histopathologic features recorded included estrogen receptor (ER) status, nuclear grade, and presence or absence of comedonecrosis. Statistical comparisons were made using the Student t test, chi-square test, Fisher exact test, Kruskal-Wallis or Wilcoxon rank sum test, multiple logistic regression analysis, and Pearson correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

A total of 304 (44%) tumors were visible on mammography and sonography; 315 (46%), on mammography only; 58 (8%), on sonography only; and 14 (2%), on neither mammography nor sonography. The most common sonographic appearance of DCIS was an irregular hypoechoic mass with indistinct margins and normal posterior features that was indistinguishable from invasive carcinoma. Patients with symptomatic high-nuclear-grade DCIS, dense breasts, and comedonecrosis were younger and had larger tumors on sonography than asymptomatic women with nondense breasts and low-nuclear-grade and noncomedo DCIS. Women with ER-negative DCIS were older and had larger tumors on sonography than women with ER-positive DCIS. ER-negative tumors were more frequently visible on sonography than ER-positive tumors (p=0.007). High-grade DCIS (p<0.0001) and comedo DCIS (p<0.0001) presented more frequently as microcalcifications, architectural distortion, and ductal changes on sonography than low-grade DCIS or noncomedo DCIS.

CONCLUSION

Of the 691 pure DCIS lesions, 362 (52%) were visible on sonography and presented most commonly as a mass. Lesion visibility of DCIS on sonography was not related to nuclear grade or the presence of comedonecrosis.

Association between mammographic density and basal-like and luminal A breast cancer subtypes

Introduction

Mammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer overall, but few studies have examined the association between mammographic density and specific subtypes of breast cancer, especially aggressive basal-like breast cancers. Because basal-like breast cancers are less frequently screen-detected, it is important to understand how mammographic density relates to risk of basal-like breast cancer.

Methods

We estimated associations between mammographic density and breast cancer risk according to breast cancer subtype. Cases and controls were participants in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study (CBCS) who also had mammograms recorded in the Carolina Mammography Registry (CMR). A total of 491 cases had mammograms within five years prior to and one year after diagnosis and 528 controls had screening or diagnostic mammograms close to the dates of selection into CBCS. Mammographic density was reported to the CMR using Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System categories. The expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 1 and 2 (HER1 and HER2), and cytokeratin 5/6 (CK5/6) were assessed by immunohistochemistry and dichotomized as positive or negative, with ER+ and/or PR+, and HER2- tumors classified as luminal A and ER-, PR-, HER2-, HER1+ and/or CK5/6+ tumors classified as basal-like breast cancer. Triple negative tumors were defined as negative for ER, PR and HER2. Of the 491 cases 175 were missing information on subtypes; the remaining cases included 181 luminal A, 17 luminal B, 48 basal-like, 29 ER-/PR-/HER2+, and 41 unclassified subtypes. Odds ratios comparing each subtype to all controls and case-case odds ratios comparing mammographic density distributions in basal-like to luminal A breast cancers were estimated using logistic regression.

Results

Mammographic density was associated with increased risk of both luminal A and basal-like breast cancers, although estimates were imprecise. The magnitude of the odds ratio associated with mammographic density was not substantially different between basal-like and luminal A cancers in case–control analyses and case-case analyses (case-case OR = 1.08 (95% confidence interval: 0.30, 3.84)).

Conclusions

These results suggest that risk estimates associated with mammographic density are not distinct for separate breast cancer subtypes (basal-like/triple negative vs. luminal A breast cancers). Studies with a larger number of basal-like breast cancers are needed to confirm our findings.

Imaging features of HER2 overexpression in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Breast cancer imaging phenotype is diverse and may relate to molecular alterations driving cancer behavior. We systematically reviewed and meta-analyzed relations between breast cancer imaging features and human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2 (HER2) overexpression as a marker of breast cancer aggressiveness. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for mammography, breast ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and/or [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography studies through February 2013. Of 68 imaging features that could be pooled (85 articles, 23,255 cancers; random-effects meta-analysis), 11 significantly related to HER2 overexpression. Results based on five or more studies and robustness in subgroup analyses were as follows: the presence of microcalcifications on mammography [pooled odds ratio (pOR), 3.14; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.46-4.00] or ultrasound (mass-associated pOR, 2.95; 95% CI, 2.34-3.71), branching or fine linear microcalcifications (pOR, 2.11; 95% CI, 1.07-4.14) or extremely dense breasts on mammography (pOR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.07-1.76), and washout (pOR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.11-2.21) or fast initial kinetics (pOR, 2.60; 95% CI, 1.43-4.73) on MRI all increased the chance of HER2 overexpression. Maximum [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose standardized uptake value (SUVmax) was higher upon HER2 overexpression (pooled mean difference, +0.76; 95% CI, 0.10-1.42). These results show that several imaging features relate to HER2 overexpression, lending credibility to the hypothesis that imaging phenotype reflects cancer behavior. This implies prognostic relevance, which is especially relevant as imaging is readily available during diagnostic work-up.

Mammographic density-a review on the current understanding of its association with breast cancer

There has been considerable recent interest in the genetic, biological and epidemiological basis of mammographic density (MD), and the search for causative links between MD and breast cancer (BC) risk. This report will critically review the current literature on MD and summarize the current evidence for its association with BC. Keywords 'mammographic dens*', 'dense mammary tissue' or 'percent dens*' were used to search the existing literature in English on PubMed and Medline. All reports were critically analyzed. The data were assigned to one of the following aspects of MD: general association with BC, its relationship with the breast hormonal milieu, the cellular basis of MD, the generic variations of MD, and its significance in the clinical setting. MD adjusted for age, and BMI is associated with increased risk of BC diagnosis, advanced tumour stage at diagnosis and increased risk of both local recurrence and second primary cancers. The MD measures that predict BC risk have high heritability, and to date several genetic markers associated with BC risk have been found to also be associated with these MD risk predictors. Change in MD could be a predictor of the extent of chemoprevention with tamoxifen. Although the biological and genetic pathways that determine and perhaps modulate MD remain largely unresolved, significant inroads are being made into the understanding of MD, which may lead to benefits in clinical screening, assessment and treatment strategies. This review provides a timely update on the current understanding of MD's association with BC risk.

What effect does mammographic breast density have on lesion detection in digital mammography?

Effective detection of breast cancer using mammography is an important public health issue worldwide. Breasts that contain higher levels of fibroglandular compared with fatty tissue increase breast radio-opacity making it more difficult to differentiate between normal and abnormal findings. The higher prevalence of breast cancer amongst women with denser breasts demands the origination of effective solutions to manage this common radiographic appearance. This brief review considers the impact of higher levels of density on cancer detection and the importance of digital technology in possibly reducing the negative effects of increased density.

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.

Mammographic density and molecular subtypes of breast cancer

Background:

Gene expression profiling has led to a subclassification of breast cancers independent of established clinical parameters, such as the Sorlie–Perou subtypes. Mammographic density (MD) is one of the strongest risk factors for breast cancer, but it is unknown if MD is associated with molecular subtypes of this carcinoma.

Methods:

We investigated whether MD was associated with breast cancer subtypes in 110 women with breast cancer, operated in Stockholm, Sweden, during 1994 to 1996. Subtypes were defined using expression data from HGU133A+B chips. The MD of the unaffected breast was measured using the Cumulus software. We used multinomial logistic models to investigate the relationship between MD and Sorlie–Perou subtypes.

Results:

Although the distribution of molecular subtypes differed in women with high vs low MD, this was statistically non-significant (P=0.249), and further analyses revealed no association between the MD and Sorlie–Perou subtypes as a whole, nor with individual subtypes.

Conclusion:

These findings suggest that although MD is one of the strongest risk factors for breast cancer, it does not seem to be differentially associated with breast cancer molecular subtypes. However, larger studies with more comprehensive covariate information are needed to confirm these results.

Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: current understanding and future prospects

Variations in percent mammographic density (PMD) reflect variations in the amounts of collagen and number of epithelial and non-epithelial cells in the breast. Extensive PMD is associated with a markedly increased risk of invasive breast cancer. The PMD phenotype is important in the context of breast cancer prevention because extensive PMD is common in the population, is strongly associated with risk of the disease, and, unlike most breast cancer risk factors, can be changed. Work now in progress makes it likely that measurement of PMD will be improved in the near future and that understanding of the genetics and biological basis of the association of PMD with breast cancer risk will also improve. Future prospects for the application of PMD include mammographic screening, risk prediction in individuals, breast cancer prevention research, and clinical decision making.