Your browser does not support the NLM PubReader view.

Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.

Associations between Metabolic Syndrome and Three-dimensional Breast Density Using Digital Mammography

Article information

Korean J Health Promot. 2015;15(4):168-174
Publication date (electronic) : 2015 December 19
doi : https://doi.org/10.15384/kjhp.2015.15.4.168
Seon-yong Bhang, Hyo-jin Lee, Jee-hyun Kang, Byung-yeon Yu
Department of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Konyang University, Daejeon, Korea
Corresponding author：Jee-hyun Kang, MD, PhD Department of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, Konyang University, 158 Gwanjeodong-ro, Seo-gu, Daejeon 35365, Korea Tel: +82-42-600-8970, Fax: +82-42-600-9095 E-mail: jeehyunkang@yahoo.co.kr
Received 2014 October 31; Accepted 2015 October 15.

Abstract

Background

Metabolic syndrome is associated with increased risk of breast cancer, but little is known about the association between metabolic syndrome and mammographic density as an independent predictor of breast cancer. In this study, we investigated the association between metabolic syndrome or its components and three-dimensional breast density using digital mammography.

Methods

We analyzed cross-sectional data of 166 women, aged 20 or over (61 premenopausal and 105 postmenopausal women) in a district hospital. Metabolic syndrome was defined according to the modified National Cholesterol Education Program’s Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP-ATP III) guideline. We measured volume percentage of dense breast tissue using digital mammography. Stepwise multiple regression analysis was used to estimate the association between mammographic density and metabolic syndrome, as well as its components.

Results

The Mean mammographic density was lower in the group with metabolic syndrome compared with the group without it. After adjusting for age and menopausal status, multiple regression analysis showed waist circumference (β＝-3.112, S.E.＝0.927, P＝0.001) and low HDL-cholesterol (β＝-2.967, S.E.＝1.109, P＝0.008) were independent variables for the percentage of mammographic density, although metabolic syndrome itself was not. After additional adjustment for body mass index, only low HDL-cholesterol was associated with percentage of mammographic density (β＝-2.953, S.E.＝0.882, P＝0.001).

Conclusions

In this study, only low HDL cholesterol was associated with three-dimensional mammographic density independently after adjusting for age, menopausal status and body mass index. These findings need to be confirmed in further larger prospective studies.

Keywords: Metabolic syndrome; Mammographic density; High density lipoprotein cholesterol; Breast cancer

Study population characteristics by metabolic syndrome status

Mean percentage of dense breast volume by prevalence of metabolic abnormalities

Stepwise multiple linear regression of metabolic syndrome components and percentage of dense breast volume

References

1. Toi M, Ohashi Y, Seow A, Moriya T, Tse G, Sasano H, et al. The Breast Cancer Working Group presentation was divided into three sections: the epidemiology, pathology and treatment of breast cancer. Jpn J Clin Oncol 2010;40(Suppl 1):i13–8.
2. Ministry of health and welfare. Annual report of the central cancer registry in Korea Gwacheon: Central Cancer Registry Center, Korea Central Cancer Registry; 2009.
3. Agnoli C, Berrino F, Abagnato CA, Muti P, Panico S, Crosignani P, et al. Metabolic syndrome and postmenopausal breast cancer in the ORDET cohort: a nested case-control study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2010;20(1):41–8.
4. Muti P, Quattrin T, Grant BJ, Krogh V, Micheli A, Schünemann HJ, et al. Fasting glucose is a risk factor for breast cancer: a prospective study. Cancer epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2002;11(11):1361–8.
5. Furberg AS, Veierød MB, Wilsgaard T, Bernstein L, Thune I. Serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, metabolic profile, and breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96(15):1152–60.
6. Piché ME, Lemieux S, Weisnagel SJ, Corneau L, Nadeau A, Bergeron J. Relation of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, tumor necrosis factor-alpha, and fibrinogen to abdominal adipose tissue, blood pressure, and cholesterol and triglyceride levels in healthy postmenopausal women. Am J Cardiol 2005;96(1):92–7.
7. Kabat GC, Kim M, Chlebowski RT, Khandekar J, Ko MG, McTiernan A, et al. A longitudinal study of the metabolic syndrome and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18(7):2046–53.
8. Bjørge T, Lukanova A, Jonsson H, Tretli S, Ulmer H, Manjer J, et al. Metabolic syndrome and breast cancer in the me-can (metabolic syndrome and cancer) project. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010;19(7):1737–45.
9. Boyd NF, Lockwood GA, Martin LJ, Knight JA, Byng JW, Yaffe MJ, et al. Mammographic densities and breast cancer risk. Breast Dis 1998;10(3-4):113–26.
10. 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(6):1159–69.
11. Shepherd JA, Kerlikowske K, Ma L, Duewer F, Fan B, Wang J, et al. Volume of mammographic density and risk of breast cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2011;20(7):1473–82.
12. Pawluczyk O, Augustine BJ, Yaffe MJ, Rico D, Yang J, Mawdsley GE, et al. A volumetric method for estimation of breast density on digitized screen-film mammograms. Med Phys 2003;30:352–64.
13. Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults. Executive summary of the third report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) expert panel on detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood cholesterol in adults (Adult Treatment Panel III). JAMA 2001;285(19):2486–97.
14. Lee S, Park HS, Kim SM, Kwon HS, Kim DY, Kim DJ, et al. Cut-off points of waist circumference for defining abdominal obesity in the Korean population. Korean J Obes 2006;15(1):1–9.
15. Rice MS, Biessy C, Lajous M, Bertrand KA, Tamimi RM, Torres-Mejía G, et al. Metabolic syndrome and mammographic density in Mexican women. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2013;6(7):701–10.
16. Conroy SM, Butler LM, Harvey D, Gold EB, Sternfeld B, Greendale GA, et al. Metabolic syndrome and mammographic density: the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation. Int J Cancer 2011;129(7):1699–707.
17. Boyd NF, Lockwood GA, Byng JW, Little LE, Yaffe MJ, Tritchler DL. The relationship of anthropometric measures to radiological features of the breast in premenopausal women. Br J Cancer 1998;78(9):1233–8.
18. Sung J, Song YM, Stone J, Lee K, Kim SY. Association of body size measurements and mammographic density in Korean women: the Healthy Twin study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010;19(6):1523–31.
19. Habel LA, Capra AM, Oestreicher N, Greendale GA, Cauley JA, Bromberger J, et al. Mammographic density in a multiethnic cohort. Menopause 2007;14(5):891–9.
20. Heng D, Gao F, Jong R, Fishell E, Yaffe M, Martin L, et al. Risk factors for breast cancer associated with mammographic features in Singaporean chinese women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13(11 Pt 1):1751–8.
21. Stoll BA. Upper abdominal obesity, insulin resistance and breast cancer risk. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2002;26(6):747–53.
22. Perks CM, Holly JM. Hormonal mechanisms underlying the relationship between obesity and breast cancer. Endocrinol Metab Cli North Am 2011;40(3):485–507. vii.
23. Woolcott CG, Cook LS, Courneya KS, Boyd NF, Yaffe MJ, Terry T, et al. Associations of overall and abdominal adiposity with area and volumetric mammographic measures among postmenopausal women. Int J Cancer 2011;129(2):440–8.
24. Boyd NF, Connelly P, Byng J, Yaffe M, Draper H, Little L, et al. Plasma lipids, lipoproteins, and mammographic densities. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1995;4(7):727–33.
25. Furberg AS, Jasienska G, Bjurstam N, Torjesen PA, Emaus A, Lipson SF, et al. Metabolic and hormonal profiles: HDL cholesterol as a plausible biomarker of breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14(1):33–40.
26. Tamburrini AL, Woolcott CG, Boyd NF, Yaffe MJ, Terry T, Yasui Y, et al. Associations between mammographic density and serum and dietary cholesterol. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011;125(1):181–9.
27. Ferraroni M, Gerber M, Decarli A, Richardson S, Marubini E, Crastes de Paulet P, et al. HDL-cholesterol and breast cancer: a joint study in northern Italy and southern France. Int J Epidemiol 1993;22(5):772–80.
28. Cowan LD, O'Connell DL, Criqui MH, Barrett-Connor E, Bush TL, Wallace RB. Cancer mortality and lipid and lipoprotein levels. Lipid Research Clinics Program Mortality Follow-up Study. Am J Epidemiol 1990;131(3):468–82.
29. Han C, Zhang HT, Du L, Liu X, Jing J, Zhao X, et al. Serum levels of leptin, insulin, and lipids in relation to breast cancer in China. Endocrine 2005;26(1):19–24.
30. Kim Y, Park SK, Han W, Kim DH, Hong YC, Ha EH, et al. Serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and breast cancer risk by menopausal status, body mass index, and hormonal receptor in Korea. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009;18(2):508–15.
31. Gaard M, Tretli S, Urdal P. Risk of breast cancer in relation to blood lipids: a prospective study of 31,209 Norwegian women. Cancer Causes Control 1994;5(6):501–9.
32. Gospodarowicz D, Lui GM, Gonzalez R. High-density lipoproteins and the proliferation of human tumor cells maintained on extracellular matrix-coated dishes and exposed to defined medium. Cancer Res 1982;42(9):3704–13.
33. Berkowitz JE, Gatewood OM, Goldblum LE, Gayler BW. Hormonal replacement therapy: mammographic manifestations. Radiology 1990;174(1):199–201.
34. Granfone A, Campos H, McNamara JR, Schaefer MM, Lamon-Fava S, Ordovas JM, et al. Effects of estrogen replacement on plasma lipoproteins and apolipoproteins in postmenopausal, dyslipidemic women. Metabolism 1992;41(11):1193–8.

Article information Continued

Copyright © 2015 The Korean Society of Health Promotion and Disease Prevention

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Table 1.

Study population characteristics by metabolic syndrome status

Characteristics (N＝166) Totala (N＝166) Without MSa (N＝131) With MSa (N＝35) Pb
Mean age, y (SD) 54.63 (10.61) 53.22 (10.69) 59.91 (8.50) 0.001
BMI, kg/m2 (SD) 24.18 (3.20) 23.57 (2.89) 26.41 (3.34) ＜0.001
Menopause (%) 0.002
Premenopause 61 (36.7) 56 (42.7) 5 (14.3)
Postmenopause 105 (63.3) 75 (57.3) 30 (85.7)
Smoking (%) 0.760
Non-smoker 164 (98.8) 129 (98.5) 35 (100.0)
Ex-smoker 1 (0.6) 1 (0.8) 0 (0.0)
Current smoker 1 (0.6) 1 (0.8) 0 (0.0)
Alcohol drinking (%) 0.130
No drinking 125 (75.3) 98 (74.8) 27 (77.1)
Past drinking 1 (0.6) 0 (0) 1 (2.9)
Current drinking 40 (24.1) 33 (25.2) 7 (20.0)
Parity (%) 0.780
No 8 (4.8) 6 (4.6) 2 (5.7)
Yes 158 (95.2) 125 (95.4) 33 (94.3)
Number of live births (%) 0.730
0 8 (4.8) 6 (4.6) 2 (5.7)
1-2 120 (72.3) 97 (74.0) 23 (65.7)
3-4 29 (17.5) 22 (16.8) 7 (20.0)
5 or more 9 (5.4) 6 (4.6) 3 (8.6)
Use of Contraceptive (%) 0.530
No 143 (86.1) 114 (87.0) 29 (82.9)
Yes 23 (13.9) 17 (13.0) 6 (17.1)

Abbreviations: MS, metabolic syndrome; SD, standard deviation; BMI, body mass index.

a

Data shown is mean (SD) for continuous variables and number (percentage) for categorical variables.

b

P value is based on student t-test for continuous variables and Pearson’s chi-square test for categorical variables. All statistical tests are two-sided.

Table 2.

Mean percentage of dense breast volume by prevalence of metabolic abnormalities

Characteristics Total (N＝166) Without MS (N＝131) With MS (N＝35)
N (%) Mean PD (SD) Pa N (%) Mean PD (SD) Pa N (%) Mean PD (SD) Pa
MS
No 131 (78.9) 23.34 (7.55) - - - - - -
Yes 35 (21.1) 18.09 (3.66) ＜0.001 - - - - - -
Components of the MS
Waist circumference (≥85 cm)
No 132 (79.5) 23.35 (7.44) 115 (87.8) 24.13 (7.59) 17 (48.6) 18.11 (2.93)
Yes 34 (20.5) 17.91 (4.18) ＜0.001 16 (12.2) 17.71 (4.13) 0.001 18 (51.4) 18.08 (4.33) 0.980
Raised blood pressure (SBP≥130 mmHg, DBP≥85 mmHg or taking antihypertensive agent)
No 78 (47.0) 24.74 (7.76) 73 (55.7) 25.13 (7.64) 5 (14.3) 19.07 (8.07)
Yes 88 (53.0) 20.02 (5.94) ＜0.001 58 (44.3) 21.10 (6.86) 0.002 30 (85.7) 17.93 (2.56) 0.530
Raised fasting plasma glucose (≥100mg/dL or taking hypoglycemic agent)
No 128 (77.1) 23.45 (7.59) 116 (88.5) 23.91 (7.77) 12 (34.3) 18.95 (2.97)
Yes 38 (22.9) 18.16 (3.67) ＜0.001 15 (11.5) 18.94 (3.12) 0.016 23 (65.7) 17.65 (3.97) 0.330
Raised triglyceride (≥150mg/dL)
No 128 (77.1) 22.74 (7.54) 117 (89.3) 23.28 (7.65) 11 (31.4) 16.94 (1.63)
Yes 38 (22.9) 20.55 (5.85) 0.100 14 (10.7) 23.86 (6.89) 0.790 24 (68.8) 18.62 (4.21) 0.210
Reduced HDL-cholesterol (≤50mg/dL)
No 112 (67.5) 23.42 (7.70) 101 (77.1) 23.93 (7.79) 11 (31.4) 18.82 (5.07)
Yes 54 (32.5) 19.78 (5.42) 0.002 30 (22.9) 21.39 (6.41) 0.110 24 (68.8) 17.76 (2.88) 0.430

Abbreviations: MS, metabolic syndrome; PD, percentage of dense volume; SD, standard deviation; HDL, high-density lipoprotein.

a

P value is based on student t-test. All statistical tests are two-sided.

Table 3.

Stepwise multiple linear regression of metabolic syndrome components and percentage of dense breast volume

Model 1 (without BMI adjustment)
β S.E P value
Reduced HDL-C -3.112 0.927 0.001
Waist Circumference -2.967 1.109 0.008
Model 2 (with BMI adjustment)
β S.E P value
Reduced HDL-C -2.953 0.882 0.001

Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; HDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; S.E, standard error. Model 1 represents the adjusted model including age, smoking, menopausal status, oral contraceptive use. Model 2 represents Model 1 with an additional adjustment for BMI (kg/m2).