The relative importance of genetics and environment on mammographic density

Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers and Prevention

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 102-112

  Ursin, Giske ^a,c   Lillie, Elizabeth O ^d   Lee, Eunjung ^a   Cockburn, Myles ^a   Schork, Nicholas J ^e   Cozen, Wendy ^a,b   Parisky, Yuri R ^f   Hamilton, Ann S ^a   Astrahan, Melvin A ^a   Mack, Thomas ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SAN DIEGO   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^f Mammoth Hospital   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; BREAST CANCER; CANCER RISK; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIZYGOTIC TWINS; FEMALE; HERITABILITY; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MONOZYGOTIC TWINS; PARITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; BODY MASS INDEX; BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CALIFORNIA; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; DISEASES IN TWINS; ENVIRONMENT; FEMALE; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK FACTORS; TWINS, DIZYGOTIC; TWINS, MONOZYGOTIC;

EID: 58349086540     PISSN: 10559965     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2857     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Saftlas AF, Hoover RN, Brinton LA, et al. Mammographic densities and risk of breast cancer. Cancer 1991;67:2833-8.
2. Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolfe J, et al. Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1622-9.
3. Boyd NF, Byng J, Jong R, et al. Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risks: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:670-5.
4. Boyd NF, Lockwood GA, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic densities and breast cancer risk. Breast Dis 1998;10:113-26.
5. Ursin G, Ma H, Wu AH, et al. Mammographic density and breast cancer in three ethnic groups. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003;12:332-8.
6. Brisson J, Diorio C, Masse B. Wolfe's parenchymal pattern and percentage of the breast with mammographic densities: redundant or complementary classifications? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003;12:728-32.
7. Maskarinec G, Pagano I, Lurie G, Wilkens LR, Kolonel LN. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: the multiethnic cohort study. Am J Epidemiol 2005;162:743-52.
8. McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:1159-69.
9. Vachon CM, Brandt KR, Ghosh K, et al. Mammographic breast density as a general marker of breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16:43-9.
10. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007;356:227-36.
11. Oza AM, Boyd NF. Mammographic parenchymal patterns: a marker of breast cancer risk. Epidemiol Rev 1993;15:196-208.
12. Boyd N, Martin L, Stone J, et al. A longitudinal study of the effects of menopause on mammographic features. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11:1048-53.
13. Vachon CM, Kuni CC, Anderson K, Anderson VE, Sellers TA. Association of mammographically defined percent breast density with epidemiologic risk factors for breast cancer (United States). Cancer Causes Control 2000;11:653-62.
14. Greendale GA, Reboussin BA, Slone S, et al. Postmenopausal hormone therapy and change in mammographic density. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003;95:30-7.
15. McTiernan A, Martin CF, Peck JD, et al. Estrogen-plus-progestin use and mammographic density in postmenopausal women: women's health initiative randomized trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2005;97:1366-76.
16. Spicer DV, Ursin G, Parisky YR, et al. Changes in mammographic densities induced by a hormonal contraceptive designed to reduce breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 1994;86:431-6.
17. Ursin G, Astrahan MA, Salane M, et al. The detection of changes in mammographic densities. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1998;7:43-7.
18. Kaprio J, Alanko A, Kivisaari L, Standertskjold-Nordenstam CG. Mammographic patterns in twin pairs discordant for breast cancer. Br J Radiol 1987;60:459-62.
19. Pankow JS, Vachon CM, Kuni CC, et al. Genetic analysis of mammographic breast density in adult women: evidence of a gene effect. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997;89:549-56.
20. Boyd NF, Dite GS, Stone J, et al. Heritability of mammographic density, a risk factor for breast cancer [comment]. N Engl J Med 2002;347:886-94.
21. Hopper JL. Why 'common' environmental effects are so uncommon in the literature. In: Spector TD, Snieder H, MacGregor AJ, editors. Advantages in twin and sib-pair analysis. London (UK): Greenwich Medical Media Ltd.; 2000.
22. Cockburn MG, Hamilton AS, Zadnick J, Cozen W, Mack TM. Development and representativeness of a large population-based cohort of native Californian twins. Twin Res 2001;4:242-50.
23. Kasriel J, Eaves L. The zygosity of twins: further evidence on the agreement between diagnosis by blood groups and written questionnaires. J Biosoc Sci 1976;8:263-6.
24. Hamilton AS, Lessov-Schlaggar CN, Cockburn MG, et al. Gender differences in determinants of smoking initiation and persistence in California twins. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:1189-97.
25. Madden PA, Pedersen NL, Kaprio J, Koskenvuo MJ, Martin NG. The epidemiology and genetics of smoking initiation and persistence: crosscultural comparisons of twin study results. Twin Res 2004;7:82-97.
26. Almasy L, Blagero J. Multipoint quantitative-trait linkage analysis in general pedigrees. Am J Hum Genet 1998;62:1198-211.
27. Stone J, Dite GS, Gunasekara A, et al. The heritability of mammographically dense and nondense breast tissue. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:612-7.
28. Richardson K, Norgate S. The equal environments assumption of classical twin studies may not hold. Br J Educ Psychol 2005;75:339-50.
29. Schork NJ. The design and use of variance component models in the analysis of human quantitative pedigree data. Biometric J 1993;35:387-405.
30. Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Modern epidemiology. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1998.
31. Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolfe J, et al. Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87:1622-9.
32. Hawes D, Downey S, Pearce CL, et al. Dense breast stromal tissue shows greatly increased concentration of breast epithelium but no increase in its proliferative activity. Breast Cancer Res 2006;8:R24.
33. Walley AJ, Blakemore AI, Froguel P. Genetics of obesity and the prediction of risk for health. Hum Mol Genet 2006;15 Spec No 2:R124-30.
34. Vachon CM, Sellers TA, Carlson EE, et al. Strong evidence of a genetic determinant for mammographic density, a major risk factor for breast cancer. Cancer Res 2007;67:8412-8.
35. Vachon CM, Sellers TA, Pankratz VS. Mammographic density of the breast. N Engl J Med 2003;348:174-5; author reply 174-5.
36. Lewontin RC. The analysis of variance and the analysis of causes. Am J Hum Genet 1974;26:400-11.
37. Lewontin RC. The analysis of variance and the analysis of causes. Int J Epidemiol 2006;35:520-5.
38. Boyd NF, Lockwood GA, Byng JW, et al. The relationship of anthropometric measures to radiological features of the breast in premenopausal women. Br J Cancer 1998;78:1233-8.