Table 5.

Logistic regression estimates for the association between microvessel density (MVD) and breast biopsy diagnosis stratified by mammographic density (MD) measures

Density measure	Below median of mammographic density measure			Above median of mammographic density measure
	Cases	Non-cases	OR (95 % CI)a	Cases	Non-cases	OR (95 % CI)a	P heterogeneityb
Volume	Effect of microvessel density (MVD)c on breast cancer risk
Global
% density (volume)	23	87	2.35 (1.33–4.14)	21	87	1.23 (0.73–2.07)	0.11
Dense volume (cm3)	22	87	1.60 (0.84–3.05)	22	87	1.78 (1.07–2.98)	0.23
Non-dense volume (cm3)	21	87	1.14 (0.67–1.95)	23	87	2.51 (1.41–4.46)	0.08
Lesional
% dense volume (cm3)	21	88	3.03 (1.61–5.70)	23	86	1.10 (0.69–1.79)	0.03
Dense volume (cm3)	19	88	1.25 (0.67–2.32)	25	86	1.90 (1.15–3.13)	0.61
Non-dense volume (cm3)	15	87	0.97 (0.50–1.90)	29	87	2.13 (1.30–3.48)	0.06

Each MD measure was dichotomized at the median based on the distribution among non-cases. ORs with P values < 0.05 are presented in bold font. Non-cases: non-proliferative benign breast disease, proliferative (ductal hyperplasia; sclerosing adenosis), proliferative with atypia (atypical ductal or lobular hyperplasia). Cases: ductal or lobular carcinoma in situ and invasive cancer

^aAdjusted for age at biopsy (39–44, 45–49, 50–54, 55–59, 60–65 years) and BMI (<25, 25– < 30, 30+ kg/m²)

^b P heterogeneity based on a Wald test in the regression model corresponding to an interaction term between the dichotomous MD measure and MVD

^cThe average of MVD within a woman was computed and standardized by one standard deviation