Skip to main content
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Dec 1.
Published in final edited form as: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2014 Dec;23(12):2765–2773. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0667

Circulating Sex Hormones and Terminal Duct Lobular Unit Involution of the Normal Breast

Zeina G Khodr 1, Mark E Sherman 1,2, Ruth M Pfeiffer 1, Gretchen L Gierach 1, Louise A Brinton 1, Roni T Falk 1, Deesha A Patel 1, Laura M Linville 3, Daphne Papathomas 1, Susan E Clare 4, Daniel W Visscher 5, Carolyn Mies 6, Stephen M Hewitt 7, Anna Maria V Storniolo 8, Adrian Rosebrock 9, Jesus J Caban 10, Jonine D Figueroa 1
PMCID: PMC4333643  NIHMSID: NIHMS632884  PMID: 25472681

Abstract

Background

Terminal duct lobular units (TDLUs) are the predominant source of breast cancers. Lesser degrees of age-related TDLU involution have been associated with increased breast cancer risk, but factors that influence involution are largely unknown. We assessed whether circulating hormones, implicated in breast cancer risk, are associated with levels of TDLU involution using data from the Susan G. Komen Tissue Bank (KTB) at the Indiana University Simon Cancer Center (2009-2011).

Methods

We evaluated three highly reproducible measures of TDLU involution, using normal breast tissue samples from the KTB (n=390): TDLU counts, median TDLU span, and median acini counts per TDLU. Relative risks (RRs, for continuous measures), odds ratios (ORs, for categorical measures), 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and p-trends were calculated to assess the association between tertiles of estradiol, testosterone, sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), progesterone, and prolactin with TDLU measures. All models were stratified by menopausal status and adjusted for confounders.

Results

Among premenopausal women, higher prolactin levels were associated with higher TDLU counts (RRT3vsT1:1.18, 95% CI: 1.07-1.31; p-trend=0.0005), but higher progesterone was associated with lower TDLU counts (RRT3vsT1: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.72-0.89; p-trend<0.0001). Among postmenopausal women, higher levels of estradiol (RRT3vsT1:1.61, 95% CI: 1.32-1.97; p-trend<0.0001) and testosterone (RRT3vsT1: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.09-1.59; p-trend=0.0043) were associated with higher TDLU counts.

Conclusions

These data suggest that select hormones may influence breast cancer risk potentially through delaying TDLU involution.

Impact

Increased understanding of the relationship between circulating markers and TDLU involution may offer new insights into breast carcinogenesis.

Keywords: Terminal duct lobular units, TDLU involution, Estrogen, Sex hormones, Breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Terminal duct lobular units (TDLUs), the histological structures of the breast that are responsible for lactation, are also the predominant source of breast cancers (1). TDLUs undergo various physiological changes throughout a woman's life (e.g., puberty, pregnancy, lactation, and menopause) and involute as women age (2, 3). TDLU involution is a natural physiologic process characterized by reduction in acini counts per TDLU, TDLU span, and a decrease in number of TDLUs (Figure 1) (4-8). Failure to undergo TDLU involution among women with benign breast disease has been associated with progression to breast cancer, independent of other breast cancer risk factors (9-13). However, the degree of age-related TDLU involution varies widely among women and factors that influence involution are poorly characterized. Identifying biological factors associated with TDLU involution in the normal breast could help determine the extent to which molecular markers may influence cancer risk through modifying breast histology (14).

Figure 1.

Figure 1

(A) A representative H&E image showing a woman with limited TDLU involution, as reflected in the increased number of TDLUs and number of acini within the TDLUs. (B) A representative H&E image showing a woman with marked TDLU involution, as reflected by few TDLUs and limited acini content.

We developed three reproducible TDLU involution measures, based on morphometric TDLU assessment (i.e., TDLU counts, span, and acini counts per TDLU), which are inversely associated with TDLU involution (15). Assessment of these measures among women in the Susan G. Komen Tissue Bank at the Indiana University Simon Cancer center (KTB), a unique resource of normal breast tissue samples, blood samples, and clinical data, found older age, parity, and menopausal status amongst the predominant characteristics associated with TDLU involution.

Our findings from the KTB support a potential hormonal influence in delaying TDLU involution, since several of these factors have been associated with differences in hormone levels (16-19). Additionally, increased circulating levels of sex hormones (e.g., estrogens, androgens, and prolactin), and decreased sex-hormone binding globulin (SHBG) levels, have been associated with increased breast cancer risk (20-22). To expand on our understanding of hormonally related breast cancer risk factors, which may influence TDLU involution, we assessed whether circulating levels of hormones are related to TDLU morphometric assessments (i.e., count, span, and acini count per TDLU) among normal breast tissue samples from volunteers in the KTB.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Population

The KTB is a cross-sectional study that recruited 923 volunteer women, without evidence of breast disease, 18-84 years of age, from January 10, 2009 through January 22, 2011. Details of this study population and subject ascertainment are described elsewhere (23, 24). All volunteers provided informed consent for the use of their donated specimens and questionnaire data for breast cancer research. Briefly, normal breast tissues and blood samples were collected along with a self-administered questionnaire (including demographic, lifestyle, reproductive, and cancer related data). All KTB data were collected with the approval of the Indiana University Institutional Review Board and the National Institutes of Health Office of Human Subjects Research (NIH OHSR #4508).

Of the 923 women, we excluded subjects who were previously diagnosed with cancer (n=75); pregnant (n=8); currently taking menopausal hormones (MHs) (n=36) or hormonal contraceptives (n=209); and/or missing information on menopausal status (n=17), menstrual cycle phase (n=109), or hormone measurements (n=13). Repeat sample collections from women who were previous tissue donors were excluded (n=46). We also excluded perimenopausal women, defined as women who had not had a period in the last 12 months but had a serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) level of <23 IU/L and estradiol level of >37 pg/ml (n=11) or women who had a period in the last 12 months but had a serum FSH level of >33.4 IU/L (n=8). Additionally, one subject with uninterpretable tissue morphology was excluded, leaving 390 subjects in the analytic population. We classified women as postmenopausal if they had an FSH level of ≥23 IU/L and reported a natural menopause (i.e., no menstrual period in the last 12 months that was not due to current oral contraceptive use), a past bilateral oophorectomy prior to menopause, or a past hysterectomy without bilateral oophorectomy and were older than 55 years of age at the time of interview.

Questionnaire data on various exposures that were evaluated as potential confounders or effect modifiers included age at tissue collection (premenopausal: <55, 55-60, or >60 years; postmenopausal: <30, 30-40, or >40 years), race (White, African American, Hispanic, or other), smoking status (no or yes), body mass index (BMI) (underweight/normal: <25, overweight: 25 to 29.9, or obese: ≥30 weight [kg] / height [m2]), age at menarche (≤12, 13, >13 years of age), parity (nulliparous or parous), age at first birth (nulliparous, <25, 25-29, or ≥30 years of age), menstrual cycle phase [follicular: days 1-11, peri-ovulatory: days 12-16, or luteal: days 17-28; calculated from self-reported last menstrual period (LMP) and assuming a 28-day cycle], age at menopause (<45, 45-49, or >49 years), menopause due to bilateral oophorectomy (yes or no), years since menopause (≤5, >5-10, >10-19, or >19), and past MH user (never or former).

Morphometric TDLU Assessment

Tissue cores were removed from the upper outer quadrant of the breast (left or right) using a standardized technique with a 10-gauge needle. One sample was fixed in 10% buffered formalin, routinely processed to prepare paraffin embedded blocks, sectioned at 5 μm, and stained with hematoxylin and eosin. Digitized images of these sections were used for analysis of percent fat on tissue slide (≤50%, 51-75%, and >75%) and measurements of TDLU involution are described in detail elsewhere (15).

Briefly, we evaluated three TDLU measures, based on morphometric TDLU assessment, and inversely related to TDLU involution: TDLU counts per standardized biopsy section, TDLU span, and categories of acini counts per TDLU (1: <10, 2: 11-20, 3: 21-30, 4: 31-50, and 5: ≥51 acini per TDLU). For women with observable TDLUs, up to 10 TDLUs per section were analyzed for TDLU span and category of acini counts per TDLU. For postmenopausal women, who had much lower acini counts per TDLU (<20 acini per TDLU), we used a semi-automated image analysis tool (25) to obtain an absolute number of acini per TDLU. Median TDLU span, median category of acini counts per TDLU (for premenopausal women), and median acini counts per TDLU (for postmenopausal women) were computed, to provide a single summary measure for each woman.

Hormone Measurements

Sex steroid hormones (estradiol, testosterone, and progesterone), SHBG, prolactin, and FSH, were measured in serum. Chemiluminescent immunometric assays and concentrations were calculated by the ADVIA Centaur instrument (Bayer HealthCare, Tarrytown, NY) through Quest Diagnostics, Inc. (Chantilly, VA) to measure estradiol, prolactin, FSH, and progesterone. SHBG was measured with the Immulite® 2000 system (Siemens, Erlangen, Germany) and testosterone was measured using liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Percent free estradiol and percent free testosterone were calculated from measured estradiol, testosterone, and SHBG levels using calculations based on the law of mass action and assuming a constant serum albumin concentration of 4.3 g/dL (26). Blinded quality control samples were placed randomly in each batch and computed coefficients of variation for each hormone were: estradiol (10.1%, n=18), testosterone (3.0%, n=18), SHBG (0.9%, n=17), progesterone (6.6%, n=12), prolactin (1.4%, n=18), and FSH (9.1%, n=17). The intraclass correlation coefficient was >99% for all hormone measures. FSH levels were used to define menopausal status and were not an exposure of interest.

All serum samples with hormone levels lower than the limit of detection were recoded as 0.0001. Among premenopausal women, 5 (2.1%) had estradiol levels <7 pg/ml (1 subject missing estradiol levels), 22 (9.4%) had testosterone levels <1 ng/dL (5 subjects missing testosterone levels), and 47 (19.8%) had progesterone levels <0.2 ng/ml. Among postmenopausal women, 37 (24.3%) subjects had estradiol levels <7 pg/ml, 25 (16.7%) had testosterone levels <1 ng/dL (subjects missing testosterone levels), and 121 (79.6%) had progesterone levels <0.2 ng/ml. Approximately 20% of postmenopausal women had detectable levels of progesterone; therefore, progesterone was only assessed dichotomously among postmenopausal women (detectable versus not detectable).

Statistical Analysis

All analyses and sensitivity analyses were stratified by menopausal status (premenopausal and postmenopausal), since these populations have differing reference ranges for the measured serum hormone levels (27-29). Frequencies and percentages were used to describe selected characteristics of the study population. Hormone levels were categorized in tertiles, within pre and postmenopausal populations, for analysis. Covariates that had a significant association with TDLU measures through Chi-square or Kruskal-Wallis tests were included in multivariable models. The final multivariable models only included confounders with a p<0.05 when assessing the relationship between hormones and TDLU measures.

Ordinal logistic regression models analyzing TDLU measures in deciles were used to assess the fit of a Poisson distribution and the Vuong test was used to assess the fit of a zero inflated Poisson (ZIP) distribution (30). To account for the excess zero TDLU counts in the study population, multivariable ZIP regression was used to calculate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the relationship between serum hormone levels and TDLU counts. TDLU counts were additionally adjusted for categories of percent fat on tissue slide, since these pathologic measures were significantly associated. Among women with at least one TDLU, multivariable, ordinal logistic regression models were used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs to assess the relationship between hormone levels with median TDLU span and median category of acini counts per TDLU (among premenopausal women), categorized in tertiles to account for non-normal distributions while still having the ability to test for a potential dose-response relationship with hormone levels. Since absolute acini counts per TDLU were available for postmenopausal women, multivariable, Poisson regression models were used to calculate RRs and 95% CIs between hormone levels and median acini counts per TDLU. The Wald test was used to assess a linear trend in the relationship between hormone tertile levels and TDLU involution measures. We applied a Bonferroni correction for multiple testing and considered a p-trend<0.0031 to be statistically significant (14 tests per outcome), and 0.0031<p-trend≤0.05 as suggestive.

Since estradiol, testosterone, and progesterone fluctuate by menstrual cycle phase (27), a sensitivity analysis that stratified models by menstrual cycle phase was conducted. Prolactin levels and TDLU measurements were assessed after stratification by parity (nulliparous and parous) since past analyses have shown reductions in prolactin levels associated with parity (31, 32). All analyses were conducted in SAS v9.3 (2011, SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

RESULTS

Subject Characteristics

The study population was predominantly premenopausal (n=238, 61%) and White (n=316, 81%; Table 1). Among the premenopausal population (mean age 35 years), estimated menstrual cycle phase at sample collection was follicular for 45%, peri-ovulatory for 19%, and luteal for 36% of women. Approximately 47% of the premenopausal women were nulliparous versus 17% in the postmenopausal population. Among the postmenopausal population (mean age 60 years), 47% of women were ≥50 years of age at menopause, 13% were menopausal secondary to bilateral oophorectomy, and approximately 50% were former MH users.

Table 1.

Selected characteristics, stratified by menopausal status, of women in the KTB

Characteristics Premenopausal (N=238)
Postmenopausal (N=152)
N % N %
Age [mean (SD)] 34.8 9.5 59.8 8.7
Age (years)
        < 20 14 5.9 -- --
        20 to 29 63 26.5 -- --
        30 to 39 75 31.5 2 1.3
        40 to 49 78 32.8 14 9.2
        50 to 59 8 3.3 77 50.7
        ≥ 60 -- -- 59 38.8
Race/Ethnicity
        White 187 78.6 129 84.9
        African American 8 3.4 10 6.6
        Hispanic 30 12.6 5 3.3
        Other 13 5.4 8 5.2
Current smoker
        No 213 90.6 139 92.1
        Yes 22 9.4 12 8.0
BMI (kg/m2)
        Underweight/Normal (<25) 90 38.2 47 31.3
        Overweight (25 - 25.9) 73 30.9 51 34.0
        Obese (≥30) 73 30.9 52 34.7
Age at menarche
        ≤12 103 43.2 72 47.7
        13 78 32.8 43 28.5
        >13 57 24.0 36 23.8
Menstrual cycle phase
        Follicular 108 45.4
        Peri-ovulatory 44 18.5 -- --
        Luteal 86 36.1
Age at first birth (years)
        Nulliparous 112 47.3 26 17.2
        < 25 50 21.1 51 33.8
        25-29 42 17.7 52 34.4
        ≥ 30 33 13.9 22 14.6
Age at menopause (years)
        <45 23 19.0
        45-49 41 33.9
        ≥50 57 47.1
        Unknown 31
Bilateral oophorectomya
        No 132 86.8
        Yes 20 13.2
Years since menopause
        <5 29 19.1
        6-8 30 19.7
        11-20 -- -- 30 19.7
        ≥20 32 21.1
        Unknownb 31 20.4
Past menopausal hormone use
        No -- -- 76 50.3
        Yes 75 49.7
Family history of breast cancerc
        No 191 80.2 104 68.4
        Yes 47 19.8 48 31.6

KTB, Susan G. Komen Tissue Bank at the Indiana University Simon Cancer center; SD, Standard Deviation; BMI, Body Mass Index.

a

Menopausal status due to bilateral oophorectomy

b

Women with unknown years since menopause either were missing this data (n=9) or were women with hysterectomies prior to menopause and were >55 years of age (n=22).

c

Women with at least one first degree relative with a diagnosis of breast cancer

Median and interquartile range of serum hormone levels stratified by menopausal status and menstrual cycle phase are provided in Table 2. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients (Supplementary Table 1) and descriptive statistics for TDLU measures by tertiles of hormone levels (Supplementary Table 2) are presented in supplementary tables. Multiple associations between serum hormone levels and TDLU counts were found to be suggestive (0.0031<p-trend≤0.05) and significant (p-trend<0.0031), among premenopausal and postmenopausal women (Table 3). Among the subset of women with observable TDLUs (premenopausal n=180, 76%; postmenopausal: n=87, 57%), no significant associations with median TDLU span or median acini counts per TDLU (categorical and absolute) were observed (Supplementary Tables 3 and 4, respectively).

Table 2.

Serum hormone levels by menopausal status among women in the KTB

Serum Hormone Levels Premenopausal
Postmenopausal
Krukal-Wallis p-values Post- vs. Premenopausal
Follicular
Peri-Ovulatory
Luteal
N Median IQ Range N Median IQ Range N Median IQ Range N Median IQ Range
Estradiol (pg/ml) 107 58.0 37.0-112.0 44 124.0 54.0-213.5 86 91.0 59.0-141.0 152 15.0 7.0-23.5 <0.0001
Free Estradiol (%) 93 2.4 1.9-2.6 38 2.5 2.0-2.8 76 2.2 1.8-2.6 130 2.3 1.9-2.6 0.71
Testosterone (ng/dL) 104 13.0 8.0-22.0 43 19.0 14.0-24.0 86 14.0 7.0-23.0 150 11.0 4.0-16.0 <0.0001
Free Testosterone (%) 93 1.4 1.0-1.7 37 1.6 1.0-1.9 76 1.2 0.9-1.6 130 1.3 1.0-1.7 0.76
SHBG (nmol/L) 95 47 35.0-80.0 39 41.0 27.0-74.0 77 58.0 38.0-93.0 134 55.0 34.0-81.0 0.97
Progesterone (ng/ml) 108 0.3 <0.2-0.7 44 0.6 0.2-1.6 86 5.7 1.0-8.9 152 --a -- <0.0001
Prolactin (ng/ml) 108 7.6 5.6-10.0 44 8.4 6.0-11.5 86 8.7 6.4-10.7 152 5.2 4.1-7.0 <0.0001

KTB, Susan G. Komen Tissue Bank at the Indiana University Simon Cancer center; N, Number; IQ, Interquartile; SHBG, Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin.

a

Women with detectable and non-detectable levels of progesterone were compared among postmenopausal women, since 80% did not have detectable levels

Table 3.

Associationsa between hormone levels and TDLU counts among women in the KTB

Serum Hormone Levels Premenopausalb
Postmenopausalc
N RR 95% CI p-trend N RR 95% CI p-trend
Estradiol 236 152
        T2 VS T1 0.97 0.88-1.08 0.86 0.69-1.08
        T3 VS T1 0.88 0.80-0.97 0.01 1.61 1.32-1.97 <0.0001
Free Estradiol (%) 206 130
        T2 VS T1 0.87 0.78-0.98 1.35 1.09- 1.67
        T3 VS T1 0.89 0.79-1.00 0.05 0.87 0.67-1.11 0.45
Testosterone 232 148
        T2 VS T1 0.94 0.85-1.04 1.18 0.97- 1.44
        T3 VS T1 0.97 0.88-1.08 0.60 1.32 1.09-1.59 0.0043
Free Testosterone (%) 205 130
        T2 VS T1 0.87 0.78-0.98 1.35 1.09-1.67
        T3 VS T1 0.89 0.80-1.00 0.05 0.86 0.67-1.11 0.45
SHBG 210 134
        T2 VS T1 0.93 0.84-1.05 1.54 1.22-1.93
        T3 VS T1 1.04 0.93-1.16 0.51 1.14 0.89-1.45 0.54
Progesterone 237 148
        T2 VS T1 0.96 0.87-1.06 0.88 0.71- 1.08
        T3 VS T1 0.80 0.72-0.89 <0.0001 0.23d
Prolactin 237 152
        T2 VS T1 0.85 0.76-0.95 1.28 1.04-1.58
        T3 VS T1 1.18 1.07-1.31 0.0005 1.29 1.04-1.59 0.02

TDLU, Terminal Duct Lobular Unit; KTB, Susan G. Komen Tissue Bank at the Indiana University Simon Cancer center; N, Number; RR, Relative Risk; CI, Confidence Interval; T1, Tertile One; T2, Tertile Two; T3, Tertile Three; SHBG, Sex Hormone-Binding Globulin.

a

Only results for the Poisson count models from the zero-inflated Poisson models are shown since no results were significant in the binomial logit models. Only p-trend<0.0031 were significant and 0.0031<p-trend≤0.05 were suggestive, after Bonferroni correction.

b

Adjusted for parity/age at first birth and percent fat on tissue slide

c

Adjusted for parity/age at first birth, years since menopause, and percent fat on tissue slide

d

RR, 95% CIs, and p-value for detectable versus not detectable levels of progesterone

Premenopausal Women

Among premenopausal women, estradiol (RRT3vsT1: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.80-0.97; p-trend=0.01) and calculated percent free estradiol (RRT3vsT1: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.79-1.00; p-trend=0.05) levels in the highest tertile, versus lowest, demonstrated suggestive associations with lower TDLU counts (Table 3). A similar association was seen for calculated percent free testosterone (RRT3vsT1: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.80-1.00; p-trend=0.05) but not testosterone (RRT3vsT1: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.88-1.08; p-trend=0.60). In analyses stratified by menstrual cycle phase, a suggestive association between follicular estradiol levels and TDLU counts (RRT3vsT1: 1.21, 95% CI: 1.04-1.42; p-trend=0.03), but not with peri-ovulatory or luteal estradiol levels, was observed (Supplementary Table 5).

No associations between SHBG levels with TDLU counts were observed (Table 3). Women with progesterone levels in the highest tertile had lower TDLU counts (RRT3vsT1: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.72-0.89; p-trend<0.0001), compared with women in the lowest tertile. This association persisted in a sensitivity analysis excluding women >45 years of age, who may have been perimenopausal (data not shown). After stratification by menstrual cycle phase, this association was only observed in the luteal phase (RRT3vsT1: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.13-0.59; p-trend<0.0001) (Supplementary Table 5). Women with prolactin levels in the highest tertile had higher TDLU counts (RRT3vsT1: 1.18, 95% CI: 1.07-1.31; p-trend=0.0005), compared with women in the lowest tertile (Table 3). When stratified by parity, this association was restricted to nulliparous women (RRT3vsT1: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.38-1.94; p-trend<0.0001), with no significant association observed among parous women (RRT3vsT1: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.77-1.00; p-trend=0.03) (Supplementary Table 6).

Postmenopausal Women

In the postmenopausal population, women in the highest estradiol tertile were more likely to have higher TDLU counts (RRT3vsT1: 1.61, 95% CI: 1.32-1.97; p-trend<0.0001), though associations were not observed with calculated percent free estradiol levels (Table 3). A suggestive association was observed between testosterone levels and TDLU counts (RRT3vsT1: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.09-1.59; p-trend=0.0043), but not with calculated percent free testosterone. SHBG levels and detectable versus not detectable levels of progesterone were not significantly associated with TDLU counts. Similar to premenopausal women, a suggestive positive association between prolactin and TDLU counts (RRT3vsT1: 1.29, 95% CI: 1.04-1.59; p-trend=0.02) was observed. Contrary to premenopausal women, a positive association between prolactin levels and TDLU counts (RRT3vsT1: 1.51, 95% CI: 1.19-1.90; p-trend=0.0009) was observed among postmenopausal parous women (Supplementary Table 6). All results were similar after exclusion of former MH users (Supplementary Table 7).

DISCUSSION

We observed significant associations between higher TDLU counts, representing less involution, with higher levels of prolactin and lower levels of progesterone, among premenopausal women, and higher levels of estradiol, among postmenopausal women. No significant associations were seen with TDLU span or acini counts per TDLU, which may be due to insufficient power since these outcomes were only analyzed among women with observable TDLUs (premenopausal n=180, 76%; postmenopausal: n=87, 57%). Also, these measures may represent earlier stages of involution whereas TDLU counts likely represents final stages of involution (5). Lack of TDLU involution has been associated with increased breast cancer risk (9-11), but relationships between sex hormone levels and TDLU morphometric assessments in the normal breast have not previously been studied. Results of this analysis suggest that hormone levels may act, at least in part, by delaying age appropriate TDLU involution, and thereby leaving a higher quantity of at-risk epithelium.

Our finding that elevated postmenopausal estradiol levels are associated with greater TDLU counts is consistent with the growth promoting role of estrogens in breast development (33) and has been well established as a risk factor for breast cancer among postmenopausal women (18, 34). In the Nurses’ Health Study, positive associations between total and percent free estradiol with breast cancer risk were observed, even when diagnosis was over 15 years after blood collection (35). In addition, estrogen levels have been linked to multiple breast cancer risk factors (e.g., older age, older age at menopause, younger age at menarche, higher BMI, smoking, and alcohol consumption) among postmenopausal women (19). Limited data also suggest positive associations between premenopausal estrogen levels and breast cancer risk (21), but we only observed a suggestive association between higher follicular estradiol levels and elevated TDLU counts.

Higher testosterone levels were suggestively associated with higher TDLU counts among postmenopausal women. Although little is known about the role of androgens in age-related involution, testosterone may influence TDLU counts as a precursor in estrogen production (36, 37). Higher androgen levels have also been associated with breast cancer risk and risk factors (e.g., older age, natural menopause, higher BMI, and smoking) among both postmenopausal (19, 20, 35, 38, 39) and premenopausal women (21, 37, 40, 41). Null associations between SHBG and TDLU counts were consistent with past breast cancer risk studies among premenopausal women (21), but not postmenopausal women where inverse associations have been observed (20).

Progesterone is related to proliferation of acini and stromal elements, particularly in relationship to development and pregnancy, with epithelial cell proliferation at its highest during the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle (27). We found that higher progesterone concentrations during the luteal phase were inversely related to TDLU counts, though we did not have data on menstrual cycle length. This relationship may be skewed by women who are potentially perimenopausal and/or anovulatory, characterized by luteal insufficiency (42), however, this inverse association persisted in analysis restricted to women <45 years of age. Our findings are not consistent with previous studies of progesterone levels and breast cancer risk that have mostly found null associations (21, 37). A positive association between progesterone and TDLU counts might be hypothesized, since progesterone stimulates lobular cell proliferation, and would be consistent with an increased breast cancer risk observed among postmenopausal estrogen plus progestin MH users versus estrogen only MH users in past analyses (43). However, more recent studies have not found an increased risk for women using progestins that are structurally identical to natural progesterone (i.e., micronized progesterone) (44-46). Additionally, emerging evidence suggests progesterone may inhibit proliferation in normal breast tissue and stimulate proliferation in tumorous breast tissue, due to possible differences in progesterone metabolism (47).

Prolactin has been shown to be involved in the proliferation and differentiation of lobular acini tissue during pregnancy and lactogenesis, but is also present throughout normal breast development (7, 48). Higher prolactin levels have previously been associated with breast cancer risk and risk factors such as nulliparity and higher BMI among postmenopausal women (17, 32, 49-52); and nulliparity, later age at first birth, and family history of breast cancer among premenopausal women (17, 31, 32, 51, 53). However, the association between prolactin and breast cancer risk was not significant among premenopausal women in extended follow-up analyses (22, 52). Our analysis found strong associations between higher prolactin levels and higher TDLU counts among nulliparous premenopausal women and parous postmenopausal women. We were not able to analyze this association among postmenopausal nulliparous women, due to a small sample size (n=26). The inability to identify an association among parous premenopausal women is likely due to our limited data on reproductive history (i.e., data for all past pregnancies, time since last pregnancy, and date of birth for each live pregnancy were not collected) and are needed to further understand the relationship between prolactin and TDLU involution.

Strengths of this study include the use of reproducible morphometric assessments of TDLU involution and access to a large sample of normal breast tissues from the KTB, representative of women in all stages of involution (18-84 years of age). Additional strengths are the standardized collection, processing, and storage of tissue and blood samples, which permitted us to explore, for the first time, the relationship between measures of TDLU involution and endogenous hormones. Our study is also representative of a healthy population since it utilized normal breast tissue samples, unlike past studies of TDLU involution that utilized collections of breast tissue from biopsies and mammoplasties from women in a clinical setting with abnormal or high risk screening results (e.g., mammogram, ultrasound, or breast exam) (54).

The cross-sectional study design limits our ability to determine temporality of hormone associations with TDLU involution; hence future analyses should replicate these finding in longitudinal samples. Time of blood draw varied and limited the ability to adjust for diurnal variations in hormone levels, but these issues would likely bias estimates towards the null and underestimate the association between hormonal levels and TDLU involution. Furthermore, blood draws were not coordinated with menstrual cycle phase and details of cycle length and regularity were unknown; therefore, phase was calculated from self-reported LMP and based off of the assumption that all women followed a 28-day cycle. Additionally, utilizing more sensitive assays (e.g., LC-MS/MS) in future assessment of estradiol and progesterone levels, in postmenopausal women, could provide further insights into hormonal determinants that may influence TDLU involution levels.

As circulating hormone levels and TDLU involution are dynamic biomarkers, particularly among premenopausal women, future research based on repeat measures may clarify relationships. Furthermore, analysis of biologically active metabolites of sex-steroid hormones have substantial differences in activity of cell proliferation, and the effect of this variation might provide further insight into the hormonal pathways involved in TDLU involution. Overall, these data suggest that select hormones are associated with TDLU counts, and may influence breast cancer risk by delaying TDLU involution. Therefore, developing an increased understanding of the relationship between hormone levels and TDLU involution may offer new insights into breast carcinogenesis.

Supplementary Material

1
2
3
4
5
6

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks are given to all KTB staff and researchers. Most importantly, thanks are given to the many volunteers who donated invaluable samples that made this study possible.

Funding: Funding for this study was supported by intramural funds from the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics at the National Cancer Institute. S Clare and A Storniolo are supported by Susan G. Komen; the Breast Cancer Research Foundation; Oracle Giving; and the Catherine Peachey Fund, Inc. Z Khodr, M Sherman, R Pfeiffer, G Gierach, L Brinton, R Falk, D Patel, L Linvile, D Papathomas, S Hewitt and J Figueroa are supported by funds from the National Cancer Institute, Intramural Research Program.

The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Health and Human Services.

Footnotes

Conflicts of interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

REFERENCES

  • 1.Wellings SR, Jensen HM, Marcum RG. An atlas of subgross pathology of the human breast with special reference to possible precancerous lesions. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1975;55:231–73. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Lanigan F, O'Connor D, Martin F, Gallagher WM. Molecular links between mammary gland development and breast cancer. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2007;64:3159–84. doi: 10.1007/s00018-007-7386-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Pike MC, Krailo MD, Henderson BE, Casagrande JT, Hoel DG. ‘Hormonal’ risk factors, ‘breast tissue age’ and the age-incidence of breast cancer. Nature. 1983;303:767–70. doi: 10.1038/303767a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Henson DE, Tarone RE. On the possible role of involution in the natural history of breast cancer. Cancer. 1993;71:2154–6. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19930315)71:6+<2154::aid-cncr2820711605>3.0.co;2-#. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Cowan DF HT. Involution of the breast in women aged 50 to 104 years: a histopathological study of 102 cases. Surgical Pathology. 1989;2:323–33. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Hutson SW, Cowen PN, Bird CC. Morphometric studies of age related changes in normal human breast and their significance for evolution of mammary cancer. J Clin Pathol. 1985;38:281–7. doi: 10.1136/jcp.38.3.281. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Tavassoli F. Normal Development and Anomalies. In: Medina MG, S, editors. Pathology of the Breast. 2nd ed. McGraw-Hill Professional; Hong Kong: 1999. pp. 1–25. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Hovey RC, Trott JF. Morphogenesis of mammary gland development. Adv Exp Med Biol. 2004;554:219–28. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-4242-8_19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.McKian KP, Reynolds CA, Visscher DW, Nassar A, Radisky DC, Vierkant RA, et al. Novel breast tissue feature strongly associated with risk of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5893–8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.21.5079. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Milanese TR, Hartmann LC, Sellers TA, Frost MH, Vierkant RA, Maloney SD, et al. Age-related lobular involution and risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:1600–7. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Baer HJ, Collins LC, Connolly JL, Colditz GA, Schnitt SJ, Tamimi RM. Lobule type and subsequent breast cancer risk: results from the Nurses' Health Studies. Cancer. 2009;115:1404–11. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Ghosh K, Hartmann LC, Reynolds C, Visscher DW, Brandt KR, Vierkant RA, et al. Association between mammographic density and age-related lobular involution of the breast. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2207–12. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.4120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Ginsburg OM, Martin LJ, Boyd NF. Mammographic density, lobular involution, and risk of breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2008;99:1369–74. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604635. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Henson DE, Tarone RE. Involution and the etiology of breast cancer. Cancer. 1994;74:424–9. doi: 10.1002/cncr.2820741330. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Figueroa JD, Pfeiffer RM, Patel DA, Linville L, Brinton LA, Gierach GL, et al. Terminal duct lobular unit involution of the normal breast: Implications for breast cancer etiology. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014 doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju286. Forthcoming. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Butler L, Santoro N. The reproductive endocrinology of the menopausal transition. Steroids. 2011;76:627–35. doi: 10.1016/j.steroids.2011.02.026. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Eliassen AH, Tworoger SS, Hankinson SE. Reproductive factors and family history of breast cancer in relation to plasma prolactin levels in premenopausal and postmenopausal women. Int J Cancer. 2007;120:1536–41. doi: 10.1002/ijc.22482. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Bernstein L. Epidemiology of endocrine-related risk factors for breast cancer. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2002;7:3–15. doi: 10.1023/a:1015714305420. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Key TJ, Appleby PN, Reeves GK, Roddam AW, Helzlsouer KJ, Alberg AJ, et al. Circulating sex hormones and breast cancer risk factors in postmenopausal women: reanalysis of 13 studies. Br J Cancer. 2011;105:709–22. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2011.254. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Key T, Appleby P, Barnes I, Reeves G. Endogenous sex hormones and breast cancer in postmenopausal women: reanalysis of nine prospective studies. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:606–16. doi: 10.1093/jnci/94.8.606. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Key TJ, Appleby PN, Reeves GK, Travis RC, Alberg AJ, Barricarte A, et al. Sex hormones and risk of breast cancer in premenopausal women: a collaborative reanalysis of individual participant data from seven prospective studies. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1009–19. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70301-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Tworoger SS, Eliassen AH, Zhang X, Qian J, Sluss PM, Rosner BA, et al. A 20-year prospective study of plasma prolactin as a risk marker of breast cancer development. Cancer Res. 2013 doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-0665. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Sherman ME, Figueroa JD, Henry JE, Clare SE, Rufenbarger C, Storniolo AM. The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Tissue Bank at the IU Simon Cancer Center: A Unique Resource for Defining the “Molecular Histology” of the Breast. Cancer Prev Res (Phila) 2012 doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-11-0234. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Susan G. Komen Tissue Bank at the IU Simon Cancer Center; Indiana: c2011-2014. [2014 August 11]. http://komentissuebank.iu.edu [Internet] [updated 2014 August 11]. Available from: http://komentissuebank.iu.edu. [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Rosebrock A, Caban JJ, Figueroa J, Gierach G, Linville L, Hewitt S, et al. Quantitative analysis of TDLUs using adaptive morphological shape techniques. SPIE. 2013:86760NN–6. doi: 10.1117/12.2006619. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Vermeulen A, Verdonck L, Kaufman JM. A critical evaluation of simple methods for the estimation of free testosterone in serum. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1999;84:3666–72. doi: 10.1210/jcem.84.10.6079. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Hall JE. Neuroendocrine Control of the Menstrual Cycle. In: Strauss JF, Barbieri RL, editors. Yen and Jaffe's Reproductive Endocrinology: Physiology, Pathophysiology, and Clinical Management. 6 ed. Saunders Elsevier; Philadelphia: 2009. pp. 139–54. [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Lobo RA. Menopause and Aging. In: Strauss JF, Barbieri RL, editors. Yen and Jaffe's Reproductive Endocrinology: Physiology, Pathophysiology, and Clinical Management. 6 ed. Saunders Elsevier; Philadelphia: 2009. pp. 325–55. [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Schreiber CA, Barnhart K. Contraception. In: Strauss JF, Barbieri RL, editors. Yen and Jaffe's Reproductive Endocrinology: Physiology, Pathophysiology, and Clinical Management. 6 ed. Saunders Elsevier; Philadelphia: 2009. pp. 873–92. [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Long JS. Count Outcomes: Regression Models for Counts. In: Bentler P, Muthen B, Rigby D, Read D, Leamer E, Ylvisaker D, editors. Advanced Quantitative Techniques in the Social Sciences. 1 ed. SAGE Publications, Inc.; Thousand Oaks: 1997. pp. 217–50. [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Wang DY, de Stavola BL, Bulbrook RD, Allen DS, Kwa HG, Verstraeten AA, et al. The permanent effect of reproductive events on blood prolactin levels and its relation to breast cancer risk: a population study of postmenopausal women. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol. 1988;24:1225–31. doi: 10.1016/0277-5379(88)90132-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Faupel-Badger JM, Sherman ME, Garcia-Closas M, Gaudet MM, Falk RT, Andaya A, et al. Prolactin serum levels and breast cancer: relationships with risk factors and tumour characteristics among pre- and postmenopausal women in a population-based case-control study from Poland. Br J Cancer. 2010;103:1097–102. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6605844. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Dickson RB, Stancel GM. Estrogen receptor-mediated processes in normal and cancer cells. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2000:135–45. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.jncimonographs.a024237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Hankinson SE, Eliassen AH. Endogenous estrogen, testosterone and progesterone levels in relation to breast cancer risk. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2007;106:24–30. doi: 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2007.05.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Zhang X, Tworoger SS, Eliassen AH, Hankinson SE. Postmenopausal plasma sex hormone levels and breast cancer risk over 20 years of follow-up. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;137:883–92. doi: 10.1007/s10549-012-2391-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Dimitrakakis C, Bondy C. Androgens and the breast. Breast Cancer Res. 2009;11:212. doi: 10.1186/bcr2413. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Kaaks R, Tikk K, Sookthai D, Schock H, Johnson T, Tjonneland A, et al. Premenopausal serum sex hormone levels in relation to breast cancer risk, overall and by hormone receptor status-Results from the EPIC cohort. Int J Cancer. 2014;134:1947–57. doi: 10.1002/ijc.28528. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Farhat GN, Cummings SR, Chlebowski RT, Parimi N, Cauley JA, Rohan TE, et al. Sex hormone levels and risks of estrogen receptor-negative and estrogen receptor-positive breast cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:562–70. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djr031. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Manjer J, Johansson R, Berglund G, Janzon L, Kaaks R, Agren A, et al. Postmenopausal breast cancer risk in relation to sex steroid hormones, prolactin and SHBG (Sweden). Cancer Causes Control. 2003;14:599–607. doi: 10.1023/a:1025671317220. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A, Afanasyeva Y, Kaaks R, Rinaldi S, Scarmo S, Liu M, et al. Premenopausal serum androgens and breast cancer risk: a nested case-control study. Breast Cancer Res. 2012;14:R32. doi: 10.1186/bcr3117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Dorgan JF, Stanczyk FZ, Kahle LL, Brinton LA. Prospective case-control study of premenopausal serum estradiol and testosterone levels and breast cancer risk. Breast Cancer Res. 2010;12:R98. doi: 10.1186/bcr2779. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Micheli A, Secreto G, Meneghini E, Krogh V, Muti P, Venturelli E, et al. Re: Endogenous steroid hormone concentrations and risk of breast cancer among premenopausal women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2007;99:408–9. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djk079. author reply 9-10. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Chlebowski RT, Manson JE, Anderson GL, Cauley JA, Aragaki AK, Stefanick ML, et al. Estrogen plus progestin and breast cancer incidence and mortality in the Women's Health Initiative Observational Study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:526–35. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djt043. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Fournier A, Berrino F, Clavel-Chapelon F. Unequal risks for breast cancer associated with different hormone replacement therapies: results from the E3N cohort study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;107:103–11. doi: 10.1007/s10549-007-9523-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Gompel A. Micronized progesterone and its impact on the endometrium and breast vs. progestogens. Climacteric. 2012;15(Suppl 1):18–25. doi: 10.3109/13697137.2012.669584. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Shapiro S, deVilliers TJ, Pines A, Sturdee DW, Archer DF, Baber RJ, et al. Re: Estrogen plus progestin and breast cancer incidence and mortality in the women's health initiative observational study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2014;106:djt372. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djt372. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Kuhl H, Schneider HP. Progesterone--promoter or inhibitor of breast cancer. Climacteric. 2013;16(Suppl 1):54–68. doi: 10.3109/13697137.2013.768806. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Barbieri R. The Breast. In: Strauss JF, Barbieri RL, editors. Yen and Jaffe's Reproductive Endocrinology: Physiology, Pathophysiology, and Clinical Management. 6 ed. Saunders Elsevier; Philadelphia: 2009. pp. 235–48. [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Hankinson SE, Willett WC, Michaud DS, Manson JE, Colditz GA, Longcope C, et al. Plasma prolactin levels and subsequent risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:629–34. doi: 10.1093/jnci/91.7.629. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Tworoger SS, Eliassen AH, Rosner B, Sluss P, Hankinson SE. Plasma prolactin concentrations and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2004;64:6814–9. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-1870. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Tworoger SS, Eliassen AH, Sluss P, Hankinson SE. A prospective study of plasma prolactin concentrations and risk of premenopausal and postmenopausal breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1482–8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.6356. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Tikk K, Sookthai D, Johnson T, Rinaldi S, Romieu I, Tjonneland A, et al. Circulating prolactin and breast cancer risk among pre- and postmenopausal women in the EPIC cohort. Ann Oncol. 2014 doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu150. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Tworoger SS, Sluss P, Hankinson SE. Association between plasma prolactin concentrations and risk of breast cancer among predominately premenopausal women. Cancer Res. 2006;66:2476–82. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-3369. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Degnim AC, Visscher DW, Hoskin TL, Frost MH, Vierkant RA, Vachon CM, et al. Histologic findings in normal breast tissues: comparison to reduction mammaplasty and benign breast disease tissues. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 doi: 10.1007/s10549-011-1746-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

1
2
3
4
5
6

RESOURCES