Skip to main content
PMC home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Int J Cancer. 2018 Apr 1;143(3):496–507. doi: 10.1002/ijc.31333

Serum insulin-like growth factor-I and insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 in relation to terminal duct lobular unit involution of the normal breast in Caucasian and African American women: the Susan G. Komen Tissue Bank

Hannah Oh 1,2,3, Ruth M Pfeiffer 1, Roni T Falk 1, Hisani N Horne 1,4, Jackie Xiang 1, Michael Pollak 5, Louise A Brinton 1, Anna Maria V Storniolo 6, Mark E Sherman 1,7, Gretchen L Gierach 1,*, Jonine D Figueroa 1,8,*
PMCID: PMC6019124  NIHMSID: NIHMS948401  PMID: 29473153

Abstract

Lesser degrees of terminal duct lobular unit (TDLU) involution, as reflected by higher numbers of TDLUs and acini/TDLU, are associated with elevated breast cancer risk. In rodent models, the insulin-like growth factor (IGF) system regulates involution of the mammary gland. We examined associations of circulating IGF measures with TDLU involution in normal breast tissues among women without precancerous lesions. Among 715 Caucasian and 283 African American (AA) women who donated normal breast tissue samples to the Komen Tissue Bank between 2009 to 2012 (75% premenopausal), serum concentrations of IGF-I and binding protein (IGFBP)-3 were quantified using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Hematoxilyn & eosin-stained tissue sections were assessed for numbers of TDLUs (“TDLU count”). Zero-inflated Poisson regression models with a robust variance estimator were used to estimate relative risks (RRs) for association of IGF measures (tertiles) with TDLU count by race and menopausal status, adjusting for potential confounders. AA (vs. Caucasian) women had higher age-adjusted mean levels of serum IGF-I (137 vs. 131 ng/mL, p=0.07) and lower levels of IGFBP-3 (4165 vs. 4684 ng/mL, p<0.0001). Postmenopausal IGFBP-3 was inversely associated with TDLU count among AA (RRT3vs.T1=0.49, 95% CI=0.28-0.84, p-trend=0.04) and Caucasian (RRT3vs.T1=0.64, 95% CI=0.42-0.98, p-trend=0.04) women. In premenopausal women, higher IGF-I:IGFBP-3 ratios were associated with higher TDLU count in Caucasian (RRT3vs.T1=1.33, 95% CI=1.02-1.75, p-trend=0.04), but not in AA (RRT3vs.T1=0.65, 95% CI=0.42-1.00, p-trend=0.05), women. Our data suggest a role of the IGF system, particularly IGFBP-3, in TDLU involution of the normal breast, a breast cancer risk factor, among Caucasian and AA women.

Keywords: insulin-like somatomedin peptide I, somatomedin C, IGF-I, IGFBP-3, TDLU, normal breast tissue, lobular involution

Introduction

Terminal duct lobular units (TDLUs) are the anatomical structures of the breast from which most breast cancers arise, and acini within TDLUs are the epithelial milk-producing substructures.1 With physiological aging and completion of child bearing, TDLUs involute, reflected in lower acini count/TDLU and total TDLU count per standard unit of tissue area. However, levels of involution vary among women of similar ages and multiple studies have shown that having lesser degrees of age-related TDLU involution is a risk factor for subsequent breast cancer.2, 3 Hence, evaluation of factors associated with TDLU involution may reveal underlying biological pathways related to breast cancer risk.

The insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I signaling plays an important role in stimulating cell proliferation and inhibiting apoptosis.4, 5 Circulating IGF-I binds one of multiple IGF binding proteins (IGFBPs),6 with IGFBP-3 being the most abundant (80%) type that regulates bioavailable levels of IGF-I.7 Studies suggest IGFBP-3 also has functional activity to influence apoptosis, independent of IGF-I bioavailability.8 Epidemiologic evidence supports the associations of higher circulating IGF-I and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio with an increased risk of various cancer types 9, 10 including breast cancer.11 The most convincing evidence comes from a pooled analysis of 17 prospective studies (4,790 cases and 9,428 controls) that showed circulating IGF-I was associated with a 25% increased risk of breast cancer when comparing women in the highest vs. the lowest quintiles and that the association did not vary by menopausal status.11 However, little is known about whether the IGF system acts upon cancer risk through influencing histologic characteristics of normal glandular tissue.

In rodent models, the IGF system has been shown to regulate growth, development, and involution of the mammary gland.5, 12-16 For example, mice with genetically-deleted IGF present with reduced ductal branching in the mammary gland.5, 15, 16 IGF signaling contributes to mammary epithelial stem cell maintenance and renewal, as well as progenitor cell expansion.13 Dysregulated IGF signaling is likely to inhibit programmed cell death, including the atrophy of epithelial cells during involution.13, 14, 17 Hence, we hypothesized that one mechanism by which IGF might influence breast cancer risk is through reduced involution. To date, the role of IGF system in TDLU involution in the human breast has been examined in two independent studies of Caucasian women with benign breast disease (BBD).18, 19 In these studies, higher levels of IGF-I and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio were consistently associated with lower levels of TDLU involution.18, 19 However, it is unknown whether similar relationships are observed in women without BBD or if associations differ by race. Given documented racial differences in circulating levels of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 20-23 and potential heterogeneity in IGF-I and IGFBP-3 associations with risk by breast cancer subtype,11 it is hypothesized that the IGF system may help understand the biological underpinnings of racial disparities in breast cancer (e.g., the observed higher age-specific incidence of triple-negative breast cancers in younger African American [AA] women 24, 25). In this study, using the diverse population of the Komen Tissue Bank (KTB) and standardized, quantitative measures of TDLU involution, we examined the relationships of serum IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio with standardized measures of TDLU involution in healthy women of European or African descent.

Methods

Study population

The KTB is an annotated biobank, which has recruited healthy volunteer women, aged 18-91 years, since 2007. From the entire KTB population, the current analysis targeted participants (n=2,321) who were recruited from January 10, 2009 to September 14, 2012. Participants provided demographic, lifestyle, reproductive history, and cancer-related information via self-administered questionnaire and donated blood and/or normal breast tissue samples on the same day. Details of the KTB have been described elsewhere (http://komentissuebank.iu.edu) 26, 27. A woman was considered postmenopausal if menstrual periods had stopped more than 12 months prior, she had undergone bilateral oophorectomy, or she had undergone a hysterectomy and was 55 years or older at the time of biospecimen collection. All participants provided informed consent and the study was approved by the Indiana University Institutional Review Board and the NIH Office of Human Subjects Research.

Of the 2,321 participants, we excluded women who were previously diagnosed with any cancer (n=185), currently pregnant (n=19), currently taking oral contraceptives (n=204) or menopausal hormones (n=81), missing menopausal status (n=28), not of European or African descent (n=201), and missing BMI (n=4). We also excluded women aged <18 or >75 years (n=19), women who had ever had a prior breast biopsy (n=233), women who were missing TDLU data (n=13), and women without sufficient serum samples (n=33). Repeated donations from the same women (n=113), identified through either self-report or genotype data, were excluded from our analysis, resulting in a total of 1,188 women (905 Caucasian and 283 AA women) in the study base.

Among the 1,188 women in the study base, we selected 998 women (544 Caucasian and 203 AA premenopausal women; 171 Caucasian and 80 AA postmenopausal women) for the final analytic population as follows. To optimize power to assess associations by race, in addition to cost considerations, we included all AA women regardless of TDLU status (n=193 with ≥1 observed TDLUs and 90 with zero observed TDLUs) and all Caucasian women with ≥1 observed TDLUs (n=590). We also randomly selected a sample of 125 Caucasian women with zero observed TDLUs, frequency matched by age (10-year categories) and BMI (<25, 25-29, ≥30 kg/m2) [1:1 for ages 30-49 years and 2:1 for other age groups] to the 90 AA women with zero observed TDLUs, for a total of 998 women.

Laboratory assay

Serum concentrations (ng/mL) of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 were measured in duplicate at McGill University by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) using the reagents from Diagnostic Systems Laboratory (Webster, TX, USA) as described previously.28 For each woman, the average of duplicate measurements was used as a summary measure in the analysis. Six quality control samples (1 follicular phase, 2 luteal phase, and 3 postmenopausal samples) were included in duplicate within and across 28 batches in a masked fashion. Coefficients of variation and intra-class correlation coefficients from the masked quality control samples were 7.4% and 0.97 for IGF-I, and 4.3% and 0.98 for IGFBP-3. The Spearman correlations between IGF-I and IGFBP-3 were 0.55 in premenopausal women and 0.62 in postmenopausal women. To approximate the circulating bioactive levels of IGF-I, the molar ratio of IGF-I to IGFBP-3 was estimated as previously described.29, 30 Because IGF-I binds to IGFBP-3 in a 1:1 molar ratio, higher levels of IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio are likely to indicate higher circulating levels of unbound, bioactive IGF-I.

TDLU measurements

We evaluated two highly reproducible standardized measures of TDLU involution, the number of TDLUs and acini per TDLU, both of which have been described previously.27, 31, 32 In brief, digitized images of hematoxylin and eosin (H & E)-stained tissue sections from core biopsies obtained using a standard 10-gauge needle were used to visually assess the number of TDLUs (“TDLU count”) and percentage of fat on the slide (0-25%, 26-50%, 51-75%, 76-100%).27 For up to 10 TDLUs per woman, the number of acini per TDLU (“acini count/TDLU”) was quantified using the TDLU analyzer software 31, 32 and the median value was used as a single summary measure for each woman. To estimate the cumulative epithelial content in the H&E slide, a product of the TDLU count and the median acini count/TDLU was calculated. Higher TDLU count, higher acini count/TDLU, and higher product of the two measures indicate lesser degrees of TDLU involution and have previously been associated with higher breast cancer risk.3

Statistical analysis

To identify potential confounders, we first assessed correlates of IGF measures. After log-transformation of the data to better approximate normal distributions, age-adjusted geometric means (GMs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of each IGF measure were estimated using weighted linear regression models. Inverse probability of sampling weights was used to weigh the sampled Caucasian women back to the base population and allows a population level interpretation of associations. In the multivariable-adjusted models, we included all the risk factors that were associated with IGF measures in the age-adjusted models. For categorical variables, we tested for difference across risk factor categories using a global F test. We also performed a test for trend by including risk factors in the models as continuous variables.

Separately in Caucasians and AA, we evaluated the associations between IGF measures and TDLU involution using menopausal status- and race-specific tertiles (T1, T2, T3) of IGF measures. Similar results were found using common tertile cutpoints for the two groups. Because TDLU measures vary greatly by menopausal status,27 associations were estimated for all women combined and separately in pre- and postmenopausal women. Zero-inflated Poisson regression (ZIP) 33 models, with a sandwich robust variance estimator,34, 35 were fit to accommodate the count data with excess zeros (zero TDLU count) and to estimate relative risks (RRs) and 95% CIs for the relationships between IGF measures and TDLU count, adjusting for sampling factors (age, BMI), parity/age at first birth, and percent fat on the H & E slide. Adjustment for other potential confounders did not change the estimates, thus we did not include them in the final models. For analyses with the product of TDLU count and acini count/TDLU, ordinal logistic regression models were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs after categorizing the outcome into tertiles. We also assessed the associations of IGF measures with acini count/TDLU alone using ordinal logistic regression models, restricted to women with at least one observed TDLU (n=594 premenopausal, 189 postmenopausal). To assess the robustness of results, in sensitivity analyses we additionally fit inverse probability weighted linear regression models with log-transformed IGF measures as the independent and TDLU measures as the dependent variables, and found similar results. We also tested for interactions by race and BMI using likelihood ratio tests.

All statistical tests were two-sided with 5% type I error. The ZIP models with the robust variance were estimated using R software, version 3.2.4, and all other analyses were conducted with SAS software, version 9.3 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC).

Results

Participant characteristics

Study participants were largely premenopausal (75%) and non-Hispanic white (72%). The mean age was 36.1 years in premenopausal women and 56.8 years in postmenopausal women. Demographic characteristics stratified by race and menopausal status are shown in Table 1. AA women tended to have higher BMI (p<0.0001 premenopausal; p=0.15 postmenopausal), higher percentage of fat on the H & E slide (p=0.0004 premenopausal; p=0.26 postmenopausal), and younger age at first birth (p<0.01 pre- and postmenopausal) and were less likely to breastfeed (p<0.05 pre- and postmenopausal) than Caucasian women (Table 1). As expected, among both Caucaisan and AA women, median TDLU count, acini count/TDLU, and the product of the two measures were higher in premenopausal women than in postmenopausal women.

Table 1. Characteristics of study population in the Komen Tissue Bank, stratified by race and menopausal status, N=998.

Characteristics Premenopausal Postmenopausal
Caucasians (N=544) African Americans (N=203) P-value Caucasians (N=171) African Americans (N=80) P-value
N (%) N (%)
Age
<30 years 164 (30.2) 45 (22.2) 0.13 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 0.58
30-39 years 173 (31.8) 78 (38.4) 5 (2.9) 2 (2.5)
40-49 years 162 (30.0) 65 (32.0) 23 (13.5) 11 (13.8)
50-59 years 45 (8.3) 15 (7.4) 83 (48.5) 32 (40.0)
≥60 years 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 60 (35.1) 35 (43.8)
Menstrual phase
Follicular 178 (32.7) 63 (31.0) 0.49 NA NA NA
Peri-ovulatory 72 (13.2) 21 (10.3) NA NA
Luteal 142 (26.1) 52 (25.6) NA NA
Unknown 152 (27.9) 67 (33.0) NA NA
Body mass index
<25 kg/m2 197 (36.2) 36 (17.7) <0.0001 47 (27.5) 13 (16.3) 0.15
25.0-29.9 kg/m2 131 (24.1) 51 (25.1) 46 (26.9) 25 (31.3)
≥30 kg/m2 216 (39.7) 116 (57.1) 78 (45.6) 42 (52.5)
Height
<160.0 cm 83 (15.3) 37 (18.2) 0.73 36 (21.1) 17 (21.3) 0.99
160.0-164.9 cm 154 (28.3) 58 (28.6) 60 (35.1) 29 (36.3)
165.0-169.9 cm 156 (28.7) 52 (25.6) 44 (25.7) 19 (23.8)
≥170 cm 151 (27.8) 56 (27.6) 31 (18.1) 15 (18.8)
Age at menarche
≤12 years 276 (50.7) 127 (62.6) 0.01 79 (46.2) 41 (51.3) 0.70
13 years 150 (27.6) 40 (19.7) 46 (26.9) 21 (26.3)
≥14 years 118 (21.7) 36 (17.7) 46 (26.9) 18 (22.5)
Parity/age at first birth
Nulliparous 272 (50.0) 83 (40.9) 0.0002 30 (17.5) 15 (18.8) 0.008
Parous, <25 years 94 (17.3) 63 (31.0) 56 (32.8) 41 (51.3)
Parous, ≥25 years 178 (32.7) 57 (28.1) 85 (49.7) 24 (30.0)
Breastfeeding (among parous women)
Never 56 (20.6) 36 (30.0) 0.04 45 (31.9) 31 (47.7) 0.03
Ever 216 (79.4) 84 (70.0) 96 (68.1) 34 (52.3)
Years since menopause
<5 years NA NA NA 48 (28.1) 21 (26.3) 0.02
5-10 years NA NA 42 (24.6) 15 (18.8)
11-15 years NA NA 50 (29.2) 21 (26.3)
>15 years NA NA 18 (10.5) 21 (26.3)
Unknown NA NA 13 (7.6) 2 (2.5)
Use of hormone therapy (among postmenopausal women)
Never NA NA NA 107 (62.6) 58 (72.5) 0.12
Past NA NA 64 (37.4) 22 (27.5)
Smoking status
Never 380 (69.9) 186 (91.6) <0.0001 112 (65.5) 44 (55.0) 0.23
Former 113 (20.8) 12 (5.9) 50 (29.2) 32 (40.0)
Current 51 (9.4) 5 (2.5) 9 (5.3) 4 (5.0)
Current alcohol consumption
0 drink/wk 148 (27.2) 81 (39.9) <0.0001 65 (38.0) 38 (47.5) 0.15 a
<7 drinks/wk 349 (64.2) 120 (59.1) 88 (51.5) 42 (52.5)
≥7 drinks/wk 47 (8.6) 2 (1.0) 18 (10.5) 0 (0.0)
First-degree relative with breast cancer
No 439 (80.7) 179 (88.2) 0.02 130 (76.0) 60 (75.0) 0.86
Yes 105 (19.3) 24 (11.8) 41 (24.0) 20 (25.0)
Percent fat on H&E slide
≤75% 264 (48.5) 69 (34.0) 0.0004 57 (33.3) 21 (26.3) 0.26
>75% 280 (51.5) 134 (66.0) 114 (66.7) 59 (73.8)
Median (IQR) Median (IQR)
IGF measures
IGF-I 151 (118-190) 148 (118-184) 108 (88-125) 110 (95-140)
IGFBP-3 4919 (4417-5459) 4306 (3787-4780) 4483 (3876-4962) 4080 (3676-4542)
IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio 0.11 (0.09-0.14) 0.13 (0.10-0.15) 0.09 (0.08-0.10) 0.10 (0.09-0.12)
Lobular involution measures among women with ≥1 observed TDLU
Number of TDLU 8 (3-17) 7 (3-14) 5 (3-12) 5 (2-10)
Number of acini/TDLU 13 (8-20) 16 (9-26) 7 (4-10) 8 (4-14)
Product of TDLU count and acini count/TDLU 112 (35-252) 128 (39-280) 28 (12-76) 35 (12-88)
Open in a new tab

Abbreviations: H & E=hematoxylin & eosin, IGF-I=insulin-like growth factor-I, IGFBP-3=insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3, IQR=interquartile range, NA=not applicable, TDLU=terminal duct lobular unit

Note: P-values were estimated using chi-square test.

a

P-values were estimated for 0 drink/wk and >0 drink/wk categories

Correlates of IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio in all women and stratified by race

Associations for risk factors and IGF measures for all women combined are shown in Table 2. Older women had lower adjusted means of serum IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio (all p-trend<0.0001). Although postmenopausal women had lower levels of all three IGF measures than premenopausal women (all p<0.0001), the differences did not persist after adjustment for age (all p≥0.07) (data not shown). BMI (≥30 vs. <25 kg/m2) was inversely associated with IGF-I (GM=124 vs. 142 ng/mL) and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio (GM=0.101 vs. 0.111) (all p-trend<0.0001). Similar patterns of associations were observed with finer BMI categories (<22.5, 22.5-24.9, 25.0-27.4, 27.5-29.9, 30.0-34.9, ≥35 kg/m2) (data not shown). Compared with nulliparous women, parous women who had their first birth at age ≥25 years had higher levels of IGF-I (GM=140 vs. 129, p=0.001). Age at menarche (≥14 vs. ≤12 years: GM=4753 vs. 4474 ng/mL) and current alcohol consumption (≥7 vs. 0 drinks/wk: GM=4970 vs. 4456 ng/mL) were positively associated with IGFBP-3 (all p-trend≤0.002); however, the association with alcohol consumption did not persist after adjustment for other covariates. We did not observe any association of IGF measures with menstrual phase, height, breastfeeding, years since menopause, and family history of breast cancer.

Table 2. Age-adjusted geometric means and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 concentration (ng/mL) and the IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio by population characteristics: The Komen Tissue Bank.

Characteristics N (weighted %a) IGF-I (ng/mL) IGFBP-3 (ng/mL) IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio
Ageb
<30 years 209 (21.6) 199 (184-214) 5219 (5114-5325) 0.137 (0.129-0.147)
30-39 years 258 (23.6) 145 (140-151) 4612 (4524-4702) 0.114 (0.110-0.118)
40-49 years 261 (26.2) 128 (123-134) 4487 (4350-4629) 0.103 (0.100-0.107)
50-59 years 175 (19.0) 109 (104-114) 4392 (4267-4522) 0.090 (0.086-0.093)
≥60 years 95 (9.6) 101 (96-107) 4118 (3850-4406) 0.089 (0.085-0.093)
p-trendc <0.0001e <0.0001e <0.0001e
Race
Caucasian 715 (76.2) 131 (128-135) 4684 (4600-4770) 0.101 (0.099-0.104)
African American 283 (23.8) 137 (132-141) 4165 (4072-4261) 0.118 (0.115-0.122)
p-valued 0.07e <0.0001e <0.0001e
Menstrual phase (among premenopausal women)
Follicular 241 (30.9) 142 (136-148) 4695 (4566-4828) 0.109 (0.105-0.114)
Periovulatory 93 (11.9) 146 (137-156) 4646 (4467-4832) 0.114 (0.108-0.119)
Luteal 194 (27.1) 143 (133-154) 4644 (4525-4766) 0.112 (0.104-0.119)
Unknown 219 (30.1) 142 (136-148) 4681 (4546-4820) 0.109 (0.105-0.113)
p-valued 0.88 0.91 0.54
Body mass index
<25 kg/m2 293 (30.5) 142 (135-148) 4594 (4485-4706) 0.111 (0.107-0.116)
25-29.9 kg/m2 253 (27.4) 136 (130-143) 4653 (4520-4790) 0.106 (0.101-0.111)
≥30 kg/m2 452 (42.1) 124 (121-128) 4453 (4361-4548) 0.101 (0.098-0.103)
p-trendc <0.0001e 0.03 <0.0001e
Height
<160.0 cm 173 (17.9) 132 (126-138) 4534 (4383-4690) 0.105 (0.102-0.109)
160.0-164.9 cm 301 (27.8) 129 (125-134) 4463 (4354-4575) 0.105 (0.101-0.108)
165.0-169.9 cm 271 (27.7) 134 (129-139) 4545 (4414-4680) 0.106 (0.102-0.110)
≥170 cm 253 (26.6) 135 (128-143) 4680 (4551-4813) 0.104 (0.099-0.110)
p-trendc 0.30 0.06 0.91
Age at menarche
≤12 years 523 (51.9) 130 (126-135) 4474 (4390-4559) 0.105 (0.102-0.108)
13 years 257 (25.1) 134 (128-140) 4512 (4403-4624) 0.107 (0.103-0.112)
≥14 years 218 (23.0) 136 (129-142) 4753 (4605-4905) 0.103 (0.099-0.108)
p-trendc 0.16 0.001e 0.61
Parity/age at first birth
Nulliparous 400 (42.3) 129 (124-134) 4534 (4421-4651) 0.102 (0.099-0.106)
Parous, <25 years 254 (23.5) 129 (124-135) 4423 (4302-4549) 0.105 (0.102-0.109)
Parous, ≥25 years 344 (34.1) 140 (135-144) 4665 (4539-4794) 0.108 (0.105-0.112)
p-valued 0.001e 0.02 0.06e
Breastfeeding (among parous women)
Never 168 (27.6) 130 (124-137) 4431 (4277-4590) 0.106 (0.102-0.111)
Ever 430 (72.4) 137 (133-142) 4557 (4442-4675) 0.109 (0.105-0.112)
p-valued 0.09 0.20 0.36
Year since menopause (among postmenopausal women)
<5 years 69 (25.7) 118 (106-133) 4313 (4037-4607) 0.099 (0.091-0.107)
5-10 years 57 (21.3) 114 (101-129) 4087 (3789-4407) 0.101 (0.093-0.109)
11-15 years 71 (30.5) 113 (99-128) 4305 (3968-4671) 0.095 (0.086-0.104)
>15 years 39 (17.1) 110 (96-126) 4043 (3607-4531) 0.098 (0.089-0.108)
Unknown 15 (5.4) 110 (93-130) 4267 (3761-4841) 0.093 (0.084-0.104)
p-trendc 0.25 0.35 0.56
Use of hormone therapy (among postmenopausal women)
Never 165 (65.1) 116 (105-128) 4182 (3941-4438) 0.100 (0.094-0.107)
Past 86 (34.9) 113 (101-127) 4433 (4096-4798) 0.092 (0.085-0.100)
p-valued 0.55 0.12 0.01e
Smoking status
Never 722 (72.5) 133 (129-136) 4529 (4440-4620) 0.106 (0.103-0.108)
Former 207 (20.8) 136 (130-142) 4642 (4495-4794) 0.106 (0.102-0.109)
Current 69 (6.7) 120 (110-130) 4465 (4272-4667) 0.097 (0.090-0.104)
p-valued 0.03 0.32 0.06
Current alcohol consumption
0 drink/wk 332 (32.2) 131 (126-135) 4456 (4336-4579) 0.106 (0.103-0.109)
<7 drinks/wk 599 (60.8) 133 (129-138) 4561 (4477-4647) 0.106 (0.103-0.109)
≥7 drinks/wk 67 (7.0) 134 (124-145) 4970 (4693-5262) 0.098 (0.092-0.103)
p-trendc 0.38 0.002 0.12
First degree relative with breast cancer
No 808 (80.2) 132 (129-136) 4551 (4475-4627) 0.105 (0.103-0.107)
Yes 190 (19.8) 133 (127-139) 4555 (4383-4734) 0.105 (0.101-0.110)
p-valued 0.89 0.96 0.91
Open in a new tab

Note: Geometric means and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using weighted linear regression models, adjusting for age (10-year categories). Age-adjusted p-values <0.05 are denoted in bold font. Multivariable-adjusted p-values <0.05 are denoted with a superscript e.

a

Weighted % was estimated using inverse probability of sampling weights and refers to the overall Komen Tissue Bank study base.

b

Not adjusted for age.

c

p-trend was estimated using the Wald test for ordinal trend variables.

d

p-value was estimated using the F test for categories.

e

p<0.05 after multivariable adjustment. Multivariable adjusted models include age, BMI, and parity/age at first birth for IGF-I; age, race, BMI, age at menarche, parity/age at first birth, and alcohol consumption for IGFBP-3; age, race, BMI, and hormone therapy use for the IGF-I: IGFBP-3 molar ratio.

Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval, IGF-I=insulin-like growth factor-I, IGFBP-3=insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3

Compared with Caucasian women, AA women had higher levels of IGF-I (GM=137 vs. 131, p=0.07) and lower levels of IGFBP-3 (GM=4165 vs. 4684 ng/mL, p<0.0001), resulting in higher levels of the ratio (GM=0.118 vs. 0.101, p<0.0001); the differences persisted after adjustment for covariates including BMI and parity/age at first birth. In stratified analyses, we observed consistent patterns of associations between Caucasian and AA women (Supplemental Table 1).

Associations of IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio with standardized TDLU count

In all Caucasian women combined, serum levels of IGF-I (RRT3vs.T1=1.35, 95% CI=1.03-1.76, p-trend=0.03) and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 ratio (RRT3vs.T1=1.34, 95% CI=1.06-1.71, p-trend=0.01) were positively associated with TDLU count, adjusting for age, BMI, and menopausal status (Table 3). The positive association between IGF-I:IGBP-3 ratio and TDLU count persisted in premenopausal (RRT3vs.T1=1.33, 95% CI=1.02-1.75, p-trend=0.04) but not in postmenopausal Caucasian women. In postmenopausal Caucasian women, IGFBP-3 was inversely associated with TDLU count (RRT3vs.T1=0.64, 95% CI=0.42-0.98, p-trend=0.04). In AA women, no association was observed overall; however, as with Caucasian women, an inverse association was found between postmenopausal IGFBP-3 and TDLU count (RRT3vs.T1=0.49, 95% CI=0.28-0.84, p-trend=0.04). After additional adjustment for parity/age at first birth and percentage of fat on the H & E slide, the association between postmenopausal IGFBP-3 and TDLU count persisted in AA women (RRT3vs.T1=0.55, 95% CI=0.33-0.91, p-trend=0.05) but not in Caucasian women (RRT3vs.T1=0.80, 95% CI=0.50-1.28, p-trend=0.37). The estimates in Caucasian women were substantially attenuated after adjustment for the percentage of fat on the H & E slide, possibly due to a positive correlation between postmenopausal IGFBP-3 and percentage of fat on the H&E slide that we observed in Caucasian women (Spearman r=0.25, p=0.001), but not in AA women (Spearman r= -0.11, p=0.34).

Table 3. Relative risks (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for relationships of IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and the IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio with terminal duct lobular unit (TDLU) count, stratified by race and menopausal status: The Komen Tissue Bank.

Caucasians
All women Premenopausal Postmenopausal
Range (ng/mL) N Model 1a RR (95% CI) Model 2b RR (95% CI) Range (ng/mL) N Model 1c RR (95% CI) Model 2d RR (95% CI) Range (ng/mL) N Model 1c RR (95% CI) Model 2d RR (95% CI)
IGF-I
T1 <116 238 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <127 182 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <97 57 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref)
T2 116-162 239 1.06 (0.86-1.31) 1.00 (0.83-1.21) 127-175 181 1.10 (0.87-1.39) 1.02 (0.83-1.25) 97-116 57 0.80 (0.54-1.20) 0.74 (0.50-1.10)
T3 ≥163 238 1.35 (1.03-1.76) 1.20 (0.95-1.51) ≥176 181 1.17 (0.89-1.53) 1.06 (0.83-1.35) ≥117 57 0.73 (0.50-1.08) 0.85 (0.60-1.21)
p-trend 0.03 0.13 0.25 0.65 0.12 0.35
IGFBP-3
T1 <4490 238 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <4603 181 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <4020 57 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref)
T2 4490-5188 239 1.03 (0.85-1.25) 1.05 (0.88-1.25) 4603-5259 182 1.26 (1.02-1.56) 1.19 (0.98-1.44) 4020-4799 57 0.79 (0.55-1.13) 0.97 (0.69-1.37)
T3 ≥5189 238 1.16 (0.94-1.43) 1.17 (0.96-1.42) ≥5260 181 1.20 (0.94-1.54) 1.21 (0.96-1.51) ≥4800 57 0.64 (0.42-0.98) 0.80 (0.50-1.28)
p-trend 0.16 0.12 0.12 0.11 0.04 0.37
IGF-I:IGFBP-3
T1 <0.093 238 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <0.099 181 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <0.079 57 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref)
T2 0.093-0.118 239 1.14 (0.92-1.41) 1.06 (0.87-1.29) 0.099-0.124 182 1.23 (0.96-1.57) 1.10 (0.87-1.38) 0.079-0.095 57 0.87 (0.56-1.35) 0.83 (0.55-1.26)
T3 ≥0.119 238 1.34 (1.06-1.71) 1.16 (0.93-1.46) ≥0.125 181 1.33 (1.02-1.75) 1.15 (0.90-1.48) ≥0.096 57 0.99 (0.66-1.48) 0.97 (0.65-1.44)
p-trend 0.01 0.18 0.04 0.27 0.99 0.92
African Americans
All women Premenopausal Postmenopausal
Range (ng/mL) N Model 1a RR (95% CI) Model 2b RR (95% CI) Range N Model 1c RR (95% CI) Model 2d RR (95% CI) Range N Model 1c RR (95% CI) Model 2d RR (95% CI)
IGF-I
T1 <117 94 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <131 67 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <97 26 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref)
T2 117-158 95 0.79 (0.57-1.10) 0.76 (0.57-1.01) 131-167 68 1.13 (0.73-1.75) 1.03 (0.70-1.52) 97-124 27 0.89 (0.42-1.91) 0.58 (0.30-1.12)
T3 ≥159 94 0.76 (0.49-1.17) 0.76 (0.51-1.13) ≥168 68 0.75 (0.44-1.12) 0.75 (0.46-1.23) ≥125 27 0.71 (0.35-1.44) 0.62 (0.32-1.20)
p-trend 0.22 0.20 0.29 0.24 0.37 0.20
IGFBP-3
T1 <3915 94 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <3941 67 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <3820 26 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref)
T2 3915-4519 95 0.84 (0.59-1.19) 0.75 (0.55-1.03) 3941-4574 68 0.79 (0.51-1.21) 0.69 (0.47-1.03) 3820-4400 27 0.97 (0.54-1.72) 0.98 (0.61-1.57)
T3 ≥4520 94 0.98 (0.67-1.43) 0.86 (0.61-1.22) ≥4575 68 1.08 (0.71-1.64) 0.93 (0.63-1.37) ≥4401 27 0.49 (0.28-0.84) 0.55 (0.33-0.91)
p-trend 0.93 0.45 0.65 0.85 0.04 0.05
IGF-I:IGFBP-3
T1 <0.101 94 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <0.111 67 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref) <0.091 26 1.0 (ref) 1.0 (ref)
T2 0.101-0.135 95 0.99 (0.70-1.40) 0.97 (0.72-1.31) 0.111-0.144 68 0.99 (0.67-1.46) 1.05 (0.75-1.46) 0.091-0.112 27 0.77 (0.39-1.54) 0.49 (0.28-0.86)
T3 ≥0.136 94 0.75 (0.51-1.12) 0.87 (0.61-1.24) ≥0.145 68 0.65 (0.42-1.00) 0.75 (0.50-1.11) ≥0.113 27 0.79 (0.42-1.49) 0.69 (0.40-1.17)
p-trend 0.14 0.43 0.05 0.16 0.47 0.27
Open in a new tab

Note: Relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were estimated using zero-inflated Poisson regression models, with a sandwich robust variance estimator. P-values significant at the alpha level 0.05 are denoted in bold font.

a

Model 1:Adjusted for age (10-year categories), BMI (<25, 25-29.9, ≥30 kg/m2), and menopausal status (premenopausal, postmenopausal)

b

Model 2:Adjusted for age (10-year categories), BMI (<25, 25-29.9, ≥30 kg/m2), menopausal status (premenopausal, postmenopausal), parity/age at first birth (nulliparous, parous/<25 years, parous/≥25 years), and percent fat on the H&E slide (≤75, >75%)

c

Model 1: Adjusted for age (10-year categories) and BMI (<25, 25-29.9, ≥30 kg/m2)

d

Model 2: Adjusted for age (10-year categories), BMI (<25, 25-29.9, ≥30 kg/m2), parity/age at first birth (nulliparous, parous/<25 years, parous/≥25 years), and percent fat on the H & E slide (≤75, >75%)

Abbreviations: CI=confidence interval, H & E=hematoxylin & eosin, IGF-I=insulin-like growth factor-I, IGFBP-3=insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3, RR=relative risk, TDLU=terminal duct lobular unit

Similar patterns of associations were found with epithelial content as indicated by the product of TDLU count and acini count/TDLU, and the positive association with premenopausal IGF-1:IGFBP-3 ratio in Caucasian women persisted after additional adjustments (ORT3vs.T1=1.65, 95% CI=1.04-2.63, p-trend=0.03) (Supplemental Table 2). Acini count/TDLU alone was not associated with IGF measures among women with ≥1 TDLU (data not shown).

There were no statistically significant interactions by race or BMI (p-interaction≥0.10), although the associations for premenopausal IGF-I and IGF-I:IGFBP ratio appeared to be stronger among women with lower BMI (<25 vs. ≥30 kg/m2) (data not shown).

Discussion

In this cross-sectional analysis of healthy women who donated normal breast tissue for research, we found evidence of associations of serum levels of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 with histologic measures of TDLU involution. Higher circulating levels of postmenopausal IGFBP-3 were associated with greater degrees of TDLU involution, indicated by lower TDLU count, in both Caucasian and AA women. In Caucasian women, we additionally found positive associations of premenopausal IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio with both TDLU count and the product of TDLU count and acini count/TDLU. Our data suggest the potential role of IGF system in TDLU involution of the normal breast among both Caucasian and AA women.

Consistent with findings from previous studies,11, 20, 21, 36-39 our data demonstrated that several breast cancer risk factors may be associated with circulating levels of IGF-I and IGFBP-3. As expected,37-41 age was inversely associated with circulating levels of IGF-I, IGFBP-3, and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 molar ratio, likely due to the lower levels of growth hormone (GH) in older women,42 as GH regulates and stimulates secretion of IGF-I and IGFBP-3.43 While some studies have reported an upside down U-shaped relationship 11, 20, 21, 39 between BMI and IGF-I, the current study found a linear inverse association, possibly due to differences in range of BMI, body fat distribution, and insulin profile. Insulin can increase GH-mediated synthesis of IGF-I from the liver by up-regulating GH receptors 44 and stimulating amino acid uptake;45 however, too much insulin may lower IGF-I levels by enhancing negative feedback on GH secretion.46, 47 After adjusting for age, BMI, and reproductive factors, our data agree with prior studies 20-23 that reported higher circulating levels of IGF-I and lower levels of IGFBP-3 in AA vs. Caucasian women. The racial differences in IGF-I levels are also present in children 23 and associated with lifestyle factors (e.g., diet 21, 36, physical activity 38, body fat distribution 29, 37, 40). The overall agreement of our results with previous findings supports the validity of our IGF data.

To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to examine the relationships of serum IGF-I and IGFBP-3 with TDLU involution in normal breast tissue from Caucasian and AA women without BBD. Previous studies have evaluated the relationships among Caucasian women with BBD only.18, 19 A cross-sectional analysis of 472 women (84% premenopausal) with proliferative BBD from the Nurses' Health Study II used visual assessment of acini count/TDLU (i.e., lobule type) and found positive associations with circulating IGF-I and IGF-I:IGFBP-3 ratio.18 Utilizing the same standardized, quantitative TDLU measures used in the current study, another cross-sectional analysis of 288 women with BBD found that elevated circulating levels of postmenopausal IGF-I and pre- and postmenopausal IGF-I:IGFBP-3 ratio were associated with higher TDLU count.19 The current analyses of women without BBD found an inverse association between circulating IGFBP-3 and TDLU count which was restricted to postmenopausal women but consistently found in both Caucasian and AA women; this inverse association agrees with the previous findings from postmenopausal Caucasian women with BBD.19 The variation in associations by menopausal status may be due to the interaction of the IGF system with other endogenous hormones (e.g., estrogens 32, 48) that are present at higher levels in premenopausal women as well as the differences in levels of both IGF measures and TDLU involution by age. In the current analysis, the inverse association between postmenopausal IGFBP-3 levels and TDLU count was attenuated after additional adjustment for percentage of fat on the H & E slide in Caucasian, but not in AA, women. The difference may be due, in part, to the positive correlation between IGFBP-3 and percentage of fat on the H & E slide in Caucasian women that was not observed in AA women. Other studies have also observed differential associations between IGF measures and breast cancer risk factors by race. For example, the Multiethnic Cohort Study found that IGF-1 levels were associated with BMI in AA, but not Caucasian, women.49 Further, data from the Southern Community Cohort Study suggest that obesity during childhood or young adulthood may have a greater impact on IGF-1 levels among white women than in AA women.20 Caucasian and AA women may differ with respect to their distributions of BMI (Table 1 and 50), body composition,51 breast density,52 IGF levels (Table 2 and 20-23), and other endogenous factors (e.g., estrogens,53, 54 adipokines,55, 56 inflammatory cytokines 57); relationships between these factors are complex and may differentially influence the TDLU involution process. Future studies are needed to clarify IGF and TDLU involution relationships by race after accounting for these factors.

Although we did not find evidence of an association between IGF-I and TDLU involution in AA women, we observed a positive association among Caucasian women. The lack of a significant finding with IGF-I in AA women in particular may be due to limited power in AA women and differences in mammographic density between the two racial groups, as the positive association between IGF-I and TDLU count was previously found to be stronger among women with denser breasts.19 Although the current study does not have mammographic density data, AA women had higher BMI, a strong inverse correlate of mammographic density.58 The current study also showed suggestively stronger IGF-I and TDLU associations in Caucasian and AA women with lower BMI. Further, the discrepancy in results with previous studies may be partially explained by differences in normal breast tissue from women with vs. without BBD, and differences in study participant characteristics (e.g., age, range of IGF measures).

Prior studies of mammographic density, another strong predictor of breast cancer,58 also support the role of the IGF system in TDLU involution of healthy women. Mammographic density reflects stromal and epithelial content and is closely correlated with TDLU count.59, 60 Studies have linked higher circulating levels of IGF-I and lower levels of IGFBP-3 with dense breasts in healthy, premenopausal women.28, 61, 62 Future studies evaluating interrelationships between IGF measures, mammographic density, and TDLU involution are warranted.

Altogether, the evidence suggests that the IGF system may influence breast cancer risk through modulating TDLU involution of the normal breast, possibly starting before the development of precancerous lesions. TDLU involution is the process by which the complexity and the content of breast epithelial tissue are gradually lost with aging of the mammary gland.63 As most breast cancers arise from epithelial cells, reduction of epithelial tissue with involution may be a physiologically protective mechanism against breast cancer (i.e., removal of the progenitor population for tumor formation). While little is known about the signaling processes that regulate involution, evidence from rodent models suggests that IGF signaling inhibits the involution process of the mammary gland.17 Our data from healthy women without precancerous lesions suggest that the IGF system influences the involution processes early in the disease process, shaping the molecular histology upon which other factors act.

Strengths of this study are the use of standardized, reproducible measures of TDLU involution, the racially diverse study population, and the unique resource of normal breast tissues from healthy volunteers. Limitations of the study are the use of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 measurements in a single serum sample. However, IGF-I and IGFBP-3 levels are relatively stable over 2-3 years within individuals,64 thus a single measurement may be adequate. We also had a limited sample of AA women; larger studies of AA women are needed to replicate these findings.

In conclusion, our data suggest that the IGF system may influence TDLU involution of the normal breast in healthy women. By evaluating associations in healthy women, our findings provide additional insights into breast cancer etiology beyond what is known from animal models and women with precancerous breast lesions. Our findings also provide further support for the evaluation of normal glandular tissue in potentially clarifying etiologic pathways to various cancers.

Supplementary Material

Supp TableS1-2

Novelty & impact statement.

Although insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I signaling plays an important role in stimulating cell proliferation and inhibiting apoptosis, little is known about whether the IGF system acts upon breast cancer risk through influencing histologic characteristics of normal glandular tissue and whether relationships vary by race. In this study, we found an inverse association of IGF binding protein-3 with terminal duct lobular unit (TDLU) count, a breast cancer risk factor, in both Caucasian and African American women.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all KTB staff and researchers. Most importantly, the authors also thank the volunteers who donated invaluable samples that made this study possible.

Funding: This study was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the Division of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics of the U.S. National Cancer Institute. The KTB is supported by Susan G. Komen, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Oracle Giving, and the Catherine Peachey Fund, Inc. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Department of Health and Human Services, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Footnotes

Authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  • 1.Russo J, Russo IH. Development of the human breast. Maturitas. 2004;49:2–15. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2004.04.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Milanese TR, Hartmann LC, Sellers TA, Frost MH, Vierkant RA, Maloney SD, Pankratz VS, Degnim AC, Vachon CM, Reynolds CA, Thompson RA, Melton LJ, 3rd, et al. Age-related lobular involution and risk of breast cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2006;98:1600–7. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djj439. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Figueroa JD, Pfeiffer RM, Brinton LA, Palakal MM, Degnim AC, Radisky D, Hartmann LC, Frost MH, Stallings Mann ML, Papathomas D, Gierach GL, Hewitt SM, et al. Standardized measures of lobular involution and subsequent breast cancer risk among women with benign breast disease: a nested case-control study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;159:163–72. doi: 10.1007/s10549-016-3908-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Deeks S, Richards J, Nandi S. Maintenance of normal rat mammary epithelial cells by insulin and insulin-like growth factor 1. Experimental cell research. 1988;174:448–60. doi: 10.1016/0014-4827(88)90314-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Ruan W, Kleinberg DL. Insulin-like growth factor I is essential for terminal end bud formation and ductal morphogenesis during mammary development. Endocrinology. 1999;140:5075–81. doi: 10.1210/endo.140.11.7095. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Burren CP, Wilson EM, Hwa V, Oh Y, Rosenfeld RG. Binding properties and distribution of insulin-like growth factor binding protein-related protein 3 (IGFBP-rP3/NovH), an additional member of the IGFBP Superfamily. The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism. 1999;84:1096–103. doi: 10.1210/jcem.84.3.5577. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Lewitt MS, Saunders H, Phuyal JL, Baxter RC. Complex formation by human insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-3 and human acid-labile subunit in growth hormone-deficient rats. Endocrinology. 1994;134:2404–9. doi: 10.1210/endo.134.6.7514998. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Valentinis B, Bhala A, DeAngelis T, Baserga R, Cohen P. The human insulin-like growth factor (IGF) binding protein-3 inhibits the growth of fibroblasts with a targeted disruption of the IGF-I receptor gene. Molecular endocrinology. 1995;9:361–7. doi: 10.1210/mend.9.3.7539889. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Ma J, Pollak MN, Giovannucci E, Chan JM, Tao Y, Hennekens CH, Stampfer MJ. Prospective study of colorectal cancer risk in men and plasma levels of insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I and IGF-binding protein-3. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1999;91:620–5. doi: 10.1093/jnci/91.7.620. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Borugian MJ, Spinelli JJ, Sun Z, Kolonel LN, Oakley-Girvan I, Pollak MD, Whittemore AS, Wu AH, Gallagher RP. Prostate cancer risk in relation to insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-I and IGF-binding protein-3: a prospective multiethnic study. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2008;17:252–4. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2694. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Endogenous Hormones Breast Cancer Collaborative Group. Key TJ, Appleby PN, Reeves GK, Roddam AW. Insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF1), IGF binding protein 3 (IGFBP3), and breast cancer risk: pooled individual data analysis of 17 prospective studies. The Lancet Oncology. 2010;11:530–42. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70095-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Dearth RK, Delgado DA, Hiney JK, Pathiraja T, Oesterreich S, Medina D, Dees WL, Lee AV. Parity-induced decrease in systemic growth hormone alters mammary gland signaling: a potential role in pregnancy protection from breast cancer. Cancer prevention research. 2010;3:312–21. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-09-0074. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Rowzee AM, Lazzarino DA, Rota L, Sun Z, Wood TL. IGF ligand and receptor regulation of mammary development. Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia. 2008;13:361–70. doi: 10.1007/s10911-008-9102-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Radisky DC, Hartmann LC. Mammary involution and breast cancer risk: transgenic models and clinical studies. Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia. 2009;14:181–91. doi: 10.1007/s10911-009-9123-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Richards RG, Klotz DM, Walker MP, Diaugustine RP. Mammary gland branching morphogenesis is diminished in mice with a deficiency of insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I), but not in mice with a liver-specific deletion of IGF-I. Endocrinology. 2004;145:3106–10. doi: 10.1210/en.2003-1112. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Kleinberg DL, Feldman M, Ruan W. IGF-I: an essential factor in terminal end bud formation and ductal morphogenesis. Journal of mammary gland biology and neoplasia. 2000;5:7–17. doi: 10.1023/a:1009507030633. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Neuenschwander S, Schwartz A, Wood TL, Roberts CT, Jr, Hennighausen L, LeRoith D. Involution of the lactating mammary gland is inhibited by the IGF system in a transgenic mouse model. The Journal of clinical investigation. 1996;97:2225–32. doi: 10.1172/JCI118663. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Rice MS, Tamimi RM, Connolly JL, Collins LC, Shen D, Pollak MN, Rosner B, Hankinson SE, Tworoger SS. Insulin-like growth factor-1, insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 and lobule type in the Nurses' Health Study II. Breast Cancer Res. 2012;14:R44. doi: 10.1186/bcr3141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Horne HN, Sherman ME, Pfeiffer RM, Figueroa JD, Khodr ZG, Falk RT, Pollak M, Patel DA, Palakal MM, Linville L, Papathomas D, Geller B, et al. Circulating insulin-like growth factor-I, insulin-like growth factor binding protein-3 and terminal duct lobular unit involution of the breast: a cross-sectional study of women with benign breast disease. Breast cancer research : BCR. 2016;18:24. doi: 10.1186/s13058-016-0678-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Fowke JH, Matthews CE, Yu H, Cai Q, Cohen S, Buchowski MS, Zheng W, Blot WJ. Racial differences in the association between body mass index and serum IGF1, IGF2, and IGFBP3. Endocrine-related cancer. 2010;17:51–60. doi: 10.1677/ERC-09-0023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.DeLellis K, Rinaldi S, Kaaks RJ, Kolonel LN, Henderson B, Le Marchand L. Dietary and lifestyle correlates of plasma insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) and IGF binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3): the multiethnic cohort. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2004;13:1444–51. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Berrigan D, Potischman N, Dodd KW, Hursting SD, Lavigne J, Barrett JC, Ballard-Barbash R. Race/ethnic variation in serum levels of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 in US adults. Growth hormone & IGF research : official journal of the Growth Hormone Research Society and the International IGF Research Society. 2009;19:146–55. doi: 10.1016/j.ghir.2008.08.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Higgins PB, Fernandez JR, Goran MI, Gower BA. Early ethnic difference in insulin-like growth factor-1 is associated with African genetic admixture. Pediatric research. 2005;58:850–4. doi: 10.1203/01.PDR.0000182583.92130.08. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Howlader N, Altekruse SF, Li CI, Chen VW, Clarke CA, Ries LA, Cronin KA. US incidence of breast cancer subtypes defined by joint hormone receptor and HER2 status. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2014;106 doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju055. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, Miller D, Bishop K, Altekruse SF, Kosary CL, Yu M, Ruhl J, Tatalovich Z, Mariotto A, Lewis DR, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2013 Table 1 12. Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute:based on November 2015 SEER data submission; [Google Scholar]
  • 26.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 prevention research. 2012;5:528–35. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-11-0234. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Figueroa JD, Pfeiffer RM, Patel DA, Linville L, Brinton LA, Gierach GL, Yang XR, Papathomas D, Visscher D, Mies C, Degnim AC, Anderson WF, et al. Terminal duct lobular unit involution of the normal breast: implications for breast cancer etiology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2014;106 doi: 10.1093/jnci/dju286. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Diorio C, Pollak M, Byrne C, Masse B, Hebert-Croteau N, Yaffe M, Cote G, Berube S, Morin C, Brisson J. Insulin-like growth factor-I, IGF-binding protein-3, and mammographic breast density. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2005;14:1065–73. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0706. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Faupel-Badger JM, Berrigan D, Ballard-Barbash R, Potischman N. Anthropometric correlates of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) and IGF binding protein-3 (IGFBP-3) levels by race/ethnicity and gender. Annals of epidemiology. 2009;19:841–9. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2009.08.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Rohrmann S, Grote VA, Becker S, Rinaldi S, Tjonneland A, Roswall N, Gronbaek H, Overvad K, Boutron-Ruault MC, Clavel-Chapelon F, Racine A, Teucher B, et al. Concentrations of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 and pancreatic cancer risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. British journal of cancer. 2012;106:1004–10. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Rosebrock A, Caban JJ, Figueroa J, Gierach G, Linville L, Hewitt S, Sherman M. Quantitative Analysis of TDLUs using Adaptive Morphological Shape Techniques. Proc Spie. 2013;8676 doi: 10.1117/12.2006619. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Khodr ZG, Sherman ME, Pfeiffer RM, Gierach GL, Brinton LA, Falk RT, Patel DA, Linville LM, Papathomas D, Clare SE, Visscher DW, Mies C, et al. Circulating sex hormones and terminal duct lobular unit involution of the normal breast. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2014;23:2765–73. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-0667. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Long JS. Count outcomes: regression models for counts. 1st. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.; 1997. [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Zeileis A. Econometric computing with HC and HAC covariance matrix estimators. J Stat Softw. 2004;11:1–17. [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Zeileis A. Object-oriented computation of sandwich estimators. J Stat Softw. 2006;16:1–16. [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Bradbury KE, Balkwill A, Tipper SJ, Crowe FL, Reeves GK, Green J, Beral V, Key TJ Million Women Study C. The association of plasma IGF-I with dietary, lifestyle, anthropometric, and early life factors in postmenopausal women. Growth hormone & IGF research : official journal of the Growth Hormone Research Society and the International IGF Research Society. 2015;25:90–5. doi: 10.1016/j.ghir.2015.01.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Gram IT, Norat T, Rinaldi S, Dossus L, Lukanova A, Tehard B, Clavel-Chapelon F, van Gils CH, van Noord PA, Peeters PH, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Nagel G, et al. Body mass index, waist circumference and waist-hip ratio and serum levels of IGF-I and IGFBP-3 in European women. International journal of obesity. 2006;30:1623–31. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0803324. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Lukanova A, Toniolo P, Akhmedkhanov A, Hunt K, Rinaldi S, Zeleniuch-Jacquotte A, Haley NJ, Riboli E, Stattin P, Lundin E, Kaaks R. A cross-sectional study of IGF-I determinants in women. European journal of cancer prevention : the official journal of the European Cancer Prevention Organisation. 2001;10:443–52. doi: 10.1097/00008469-200110000-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Holmes MD, Pollak MN, Hankinson SE. Lifestyle correlates of plasma insulin-like growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 3 concentrations. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2002;11:862–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Parekh N, Roberts CB, Vadiveloo M, Puvananayagam T, Albu JB, Lu-Yao GL. Lifestyle, anthropometric, and obesity-related physiologic determinants of insulin-like growth factor-1 in the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (1988-1994) Annals of epidemiology. 2010;20:182–93. doi: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2009.11.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Landin-Wilhelmsen K, Lundberg PA, Lappas G, Wilhelmsen L. Insulin-like growth factor I levels in healthy adults. Hormone research. 2004;62(Suppl 1):8–16. doi: 10.1159/000080753. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Landin-Wilhelmsen K, Wilhelmsen L, Lappas G, Rosen T, Lindstedt G, Lundberg PA, Bengtsson BA. Serum insulin-like growth factor I in a random population sample of men and women: relation to age, sex, smoking habits, coffee consumption and physical activity, blood pressure and concentrations of plasma lipids, fibrinogen, parathyroid hormone and osteocalcin. Clinical endocrinology. 1994;41:351–7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2265.1994.tb02556.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Jones JI, Clemmons DR. Insulin-like growth factors and their binding proteins: biological actions. Endocrine reviews. 1995;16:3–34. doi: 10.1210/edrv-16-1-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Baxter RC, Turtle JR. Regulation of hepatic growth hormone receptors by insulin. Biochemical and biophysical research communications. 1978;84:350–7. doi: 10.1016/0006-291x(78)90177-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Thissen JP, Ketelslegers JM, Underwood LE. Nutritional regulation of the insulin-like growth factors. Endocrine reviews. 1994;15:80–101. doi: 10.1210/edrv-15-1-80. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Kaaks R, Lukanova A. Energy balance and cancer: the role of insulin and insulin-like growth factor-I. The Proceedings of the Nutrition Society. 2001;60:91–106. doi: 10.1079/pns200070. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Tannenbaum GS, Guyda HJ, Posner BI. Insulin-like growth factors: a role in growth hormone negative feedback and body weight regulation via brain. Science. 1983;220:77–9. doi: 10.1126/science.6338593. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Oh H, Khodr ZG, Sherman ME, Palakal M, Pfeiffer RM, Linville L, Geller BM, Vacek PM, Weaver DL, Chicoine RE, Falk RT, Horne HN, et al. Relation of Serum Estrogen Metabolites with Terminal Duct Lobular Unit Involution Among Women Undergoing Diagnostic Image-Guided Breast Biopsy. Hormones & cancer. 2016;7:305–15. doi: 10.1007/s12672-016-0265-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Henderson KD, Goran MI, Kolonel LN, Henderson BE, Le Marchand L. Ethnic disparity in the relationship between obesity and plasma insulin-like growth factors: the multiethnic cohort. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2006;15:2298–302. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0344. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Hales CM, Carroll MD, Fryar CD, Ogden CL. Prevalence of Obesity Among Adults and Youth: United States, 2015-2016. NCHS data brief. 2017:1–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Rahman M, Temple JR, Breitkopf CR, Berenson AB. Racial differences in body fat distribution among reproductive-aged women. Metabolism: clinical and experimental. 2009;58:1329–37. doi: 10.1016/j.metabol.2009.04.017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.del Carmen MG, Hughes KS, Halpern E, Rafferty E, Kopans D, Parisky YR, Sardi A, Esserman L, Rust S, Michaelson J. Racial differences in mammographic breast density. Cancer. 2003;98:590–6. doi: 10.1002/cncr.11517. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Pinheiro SP, Holmes MD, Pollak MN, Barbieri RL, Hankinson SE. Racial differences in premenopausal endogenous hormones. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2005;14:2147–53. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04-0944. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Setiawan VW, Haiman CA, Stanczyk FZ, Le Marchand L, Henderson BE. Racial/ethnic differences in postmenopausal endogenous hormones: the multiethnic cohort study. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2006;15:1849–55. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Khan UI, Wang D, Sowers MR, Mancuso P, Everson-Rose SA, Scherer PE, Wildman RP. Race-ethnic differences in adipokine levels: the Study of Women's Health Across the Nation (SWAN) Metabolism: clinical and experimental. 2012;61:1261–9. doi: 10.1016/j.metabol.2012.02.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Morimoto Y, Conroy SM, Ollberding NJ, Kim Y, Lim U, Cooney RV, Franke AA, Wilkens LR, Hernandez BY, Goodman MT, Henderson BE, Kolonel LN, et al. Ethnic differences in serum adipokine and C-reactive protein levels: the multiethnic cohort. International journal of obesity. 2014;38:1416–22. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2014.25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Park NJ, Kang DH. Inflammatory cytokine levels and breast cancer risk factors: racial differences of healthy Caucasian and African American women. Oncology nursing forum. 2013;40:490–500. doi: 10.1188/13.ONF.40-05AP. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Sun L, Guo H, Chiarelli A, Hislop G, Yaffe M, Minkin S. Body size, mammographic density, and breast cancer risk. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2006;15:2086–92. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0345. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Ghosh K, Hartmann LC, Reynolds C, Visscher DW, Brandt KR, Vierkant RA, Scott CG, Radisky DC, Sellers TA, Pankratz VS, Vachon CM. Association between mammographic density and age-related lobular involution of the breast. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2010;28:2207–12. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.4120. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Gierach GL, Patel DA, Pfeiffer RM, Figueroa JD, Linville L, Papathomas D, Johnson JM, Chicoine RE, Herschorn SD, Shepherd JA, Wang J, Malkov S, et al. Relationship of Terminal Duct Lobular Unit Involution of the Breast with Area and Volume Mammographic Densities. Cancer prevention research. 2016;9:149–58. doi: 10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-15-0282. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Byrne C, Colditz GA, Willett WC, Speizer FE, Pollak M, Hankinson SE. Plasma insulin-like growth factor (IGF) I, IGF-binding protein 3, and mammographic density. Cancer research. 2000;60:3744–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Maskarinec G, Williams AE, Kaaks R. A cross-sectional investigation of breast density and insulin-like growth factor I. International journal of cancer. 2003;107:991–6. doi: 10.1002/ijc.11505. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Hutson SW, Cowen PN, Bird CC. Morphometric studies of age related changes in normal human breast and their significance for evolution of mammary cancer. Journal of clinical pathology. 1985;38:281–7. doi: 10.1136/jcp.38.3.281. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Missmer SA, Spiegelman D, Bertone-Johnson ER, Barbieri RL, Pollak MN, Hankinson SE. Reproducibility of plasma steroid hormones, prolactin, and insulin-like growth factor levels among premenopausal women over a 2- to 3-year period. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 2006;15:972–8. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-05-0848. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

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

Supplementary Materials

Supp TableS1-2
NIHMS948401-supplement-Supp_TableS1-2.docx (138KB, docx)

RESOURCES