Familial Aspects of Mammographic Density Measures Associated with Breast Cancer Risk

Breast and bowel cancers diagnosed in people 'too young to have cancer': A blueprint for research using family and twin studies

Young breast and bowel cancers (e.g., those diagnosed before age 40 or 50 years) have far greater morbidity and mortality in terms of years of life lost, and are increasing in incidence, but have been less studied. For breast and bowel cancers, the familial relative risks, and therefore the familial variances in age-specific log(incidence), are much greater at younger ages, but little of these familial variances has been explained. Studies of families and twins can address questions not easily answered by studies of unrelated individuals alone. We describe existing and emerging family and twin data that can provide special opportunities for discovery. We present designs and statistical analyses, including novel ideas such as the VALID (Variance in Age-specific Log Incidence Decomposition) model for causes of variation in risk, the DEPTH (DEPendency of association on the number of Top Hits) and other approaches to analyse genome-wide association study data, and the within-pair, ICE FALCON (Inference about Causation from Examining FAmiliaL CONfounding) and ICE CRISTAL (Inference about Causation from Examining Changes in Regression coefficients and Innovative STatistical AnaLysis) approaches to causation and familial confounding. Example applications to breast and colorectal cancer are presented. Motivated by the availability of the resources of the Breast and Colon Cancer Family Registries, we also present some ideas for future studies that could be applied to, and compared with, cancers diagnosed at older ages and address the challenges posed by young breast and bowel cancers.

Causal relationships between breast cancer risk factors based on mammographic features

BACKGROUND

Mammogram risk scores based on texture and density defined by different brightness thresholds are associated with breast cancer risk differently and could reveal distinct information about breast cancer risk. We aimed to investigate causal relationships between these intercorrelated mammogram risk scores to determine their relevance to breast cancer aetiology.

METHODS

We used digitised mammograms for 371 monozygotic twin pairs, aged 40-70 years without a prior diagnosis of breast cancer at the time of mammography, from the Australian Mammographic Density Twins and Sisters Study. We generated normalised, age-adjusted, and standardised risk scores based on textures using the Cirrus algorithm and on three spatially independent dense areas defined by increasing brightness threshold: light areas, bright areas, and brightest areas. Causal inference was made using the Inference about Causation from Examination of FAmilial CONfounding (ICE FALCON) method.

RESULTS

The mammogram risk scores were correlated within twin pairs and with each other (r = 0.22-0.81; all P < 0.005). We estimated that 28-92% of the associations between the risk scores could be attributed to causal relationships between the scores, with the rest attributed to familial confounders shared by the scores. There was consistent evidence for positive causal effects: of Cirrus, light areas, and bright areas on the brightest areas (accounting for 34%, 55%, and 85% of the associations, respectively); and of light areas and bright areas on Cirrus (accounting for 37% and 28%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

In a mammogram, the lighter (less dense) areas have a causal effect on the brightest (highly dense) areas, including through a causal pathway via textural features. These causal relationships help us gain insight into the relative aetiological importance of different mammographic features in breast cancer. For example our findings are consistent with the brightest areas being more aetiologically important than lighter areas for screen-detected breast cancer; conversely, light areas being more aetiologically important for interval breast cancer. Additionally, specific textural features capture aetiologically independent breast cancer risk information from dense areas. These findings highlight the utility of ICE FALCON and family data in decomposing the associations between intercorrelated disease biomarkers into distinct biological pathways.

Variance of age-specific log incidence decomposition (VALID): a unifying model of measured and unmeasured genetic and non-genetic risks

BACKGROUND

The extent to which known and unknown factors explain how much people of the same age differ in disease risk is fundamental to epidemiology. Risk factors can be correlated in relatives, so familial aspects of risk (genetic and non-genetic) must be considered.

DEVELOPMENT

We present a unifying model (VALID) for variance in risk, with risk defined as log(incidence) or logit(cumulative incidence). Consider a normally distributed risk score with incidence increasing exponentially as the risk increases. VALID's building block is variance in risk, Δ2, where Δ = log(OPERA) is the difference in mean between cases and controls and OPERA is the odds ratio per standard deviation. A risk score correlated r between a pair of relatives generates a familial odds ratio of exp(rΔ2). Familial risk ratios, therefore, can be converted into variance components of risk, extending Fisher's classic decomposition of familial variation to binary traits. Under VALID, there is a natural upper limit to variance in risk caused by genetic factors, determined by the familial odds ratio for genetically identical twin pairs, but not to variation caused by non-genetic factors.

APPLICATION

For female breast cancer, VALID quantified how much variance in risk is explained-at different ages-by known and unknown major genes and polygenes, non-genomic risk factors correlated in relatives, and known individual-specific factors.

CONCLUSION

VALID has shown that, while substantial genetic risk factors have been discovered, much is unknown about genetic and familial aspects of breast cancer risk especially for young women, and little is known about individual-specific variance in risk.

Genetic Aspects of Mammographic Density Measures Associated with Breast Cancer Risk

Cumulus, Altocumulus, and Cirrocumulus are measures of mammographic density defined at increasing pixel brightness thresholds, which, when converted to mammogram risk scores (MRSs), predict breast cancer risk. Twin and family studies suggest substantial variance in the MRSs could be explained by genetic factors. For 2559 women aged 30 to 80 years (mean 54 years), we measured the MRSs from digitized film mammograms and estimated the associations of the MRSs with a 313-SNP breast cancer polygenic risk score (PRS) and 202 individual SNPs associated with breast cancer risk. The PRS was weakly positively correlated (correlation coefficients ranged 0.05−0.08; all p < 0.04) with all the MRSs except the Cumulus-white MRS based on the “white but not bright area” (correlation coefficient = 0.04; p = 0.06). After adjusting for its association with the Altocumulus MRS, the PRS was not associated with the Cumulus MRS. There were MRS associations (Bonferroni-adjusted p < 0.04) with one SNP in the ATXN1 gene and nominally with some ESR1 SNPs. Less than 1% of the variance of the MRSs is explained by the genetic markers currently known to be associated with breast cancer risk. Discovering the genetic determinants of the bright, not white, regions of the mammogram could reveal substantial new genetic causes of breast cancer.

Familial Aspects of Mammographic Density Measures Associated with Breast Cancer Risk

Simple Summary

Cumulus, Cumulus-percent, Altocumulus, Cirrocumulus, and Cumulus-white are mammogram risk scores (MRSs) that predict a woman’s risk of breast cancer based on mammographically dense areas when defined by different levels of brightness. We measured these MRS for 593 monozygotic (MZ) and 326 dizygotic (DZ) female twin pairs and 1592 of their sisters. We estimated how much these MRSs were correlated in relatives (ρ), how much of the differences between women were due to genetic factors (heritability), and how much these MRS explained why breast cancer runs in families. The ρ estimates ranged from: 0.41 to 0.60 for MZ pairs, 0.16 to 0.26 for DZ pairs, and 0.19 to 0.29 sister pairs, respectively. Heritability estimates were 36% to 69%. Genetic factors explain most of why twins and sisters are similar in their MRS, and these genetic factors explain one-quarter to one-half as much breast cancer risk as to the current best genetic risk score.

Abstract

Cumulus, Cumulus-percent, Altocumulus, Cirrocumulus, and Cumulus-white are mammogram risk scores (MRSs) for breast cancer based on mammographic density defined in effect by different levels of pixel brightness and adjusted for age and body mass index. We measured these MRS from digitized film mammograms for 593 monozygotic (MZ) and 326 dizygotic (DZ) female twin pairs and 1592 of their sisters. We estimated the correlations in relatives (r) and the proportion of variance due to genetic factors (heritability) using the software FISHER and predicted the familial risk ratio (FRR) associated with each MRS. The ρ estimates ranged from: 0.41 to 0.60 (standard error [SE] 0.02) for MZ pairs, 0.16 to 0.26 (SE 0.05) for DZ pairs, and 0.19 to 0.29 (SE 0.02) for sister pairs (including pairs of a twin and her non-twin sister), respectively. Heritability estimates were 39% to 69% under the classic twin model and 36% to 56% when allowing for shared non-genetic factors specific to MZ pairs. The FRRs were 1.08 to 1.17. These MRSs are substantially familial, due mostly to genetic factors that explain one-quarter to one-half as much of the familial aggregation of breast cancer that is explained by the current best polygenic risk score.