Abstract
Purpose:
We investigated the associations of aspirin and other non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) with mammographic breast density (MBD) and their interactions in relation to breast cancer risk.
Methods:
This study included 3,675 cancer-free women within the Nurses’ Health Study (NHS) and Nurses’ Health Study II (NHSII) cohorts. Percent breast density (PD), absolute dense area (DA), and non-dense area (NDA) were measured from digitized film mammograms using a computer-assisted thresholding technique; all measures were square root-transformed. Information on medication use was collected in 1980 (NHS) and 1989 (NHSII) and updated biennially. Medication use was defined as none, past or current; average cumulative dose and frequency were calculated for all past or current users from all bi-annual questionnaires preceding the mammogram date. We used generalized linear regression to quantify associations of medications with MBD. Two-way interactions were examined in logistic regression models.
Results:
In multivariate analysis, none of the anti-inflammatory medications were associated with PD, DA and NDA. We found no interactions of any of the medications with PD with respect to breast cancer risk (all p-interactions>0.05). However, some of the aspirin variables appeared to have positive associations with breast cancer risk limited only to women with PD 10–24% (past aspirin OR=1.56, 95% CI 1.03–2.35; current aspirin with <5 years of use OR=1.82, 95% CI 1.01–3.28; current aspirin with ≥5 years of use OR=1.89, 95% CI 1.26–2.82).
Conclusions:
Aspirin and NSAIDs are not associated with breast density measures. We found no interactions of aspirin with MBD in relation to breast cancer risk.
Keywords: aspirin, breast density, breast cancer, interactions
Introduction
Mammographic breast density is a well-established and strong predictor of breast cancer risk (1–4). Appearance of the breast on the mammogram is a reflection of the amount of fat, connective tissue, and epithelial tissue in the breast (3). Light (non-radiolucent) areas on the mammogram represent the connective and epithelial tissues (“mammographically dense”), whereas, the dark (radiolucent) areas represent primarily fat. Women with breasts of 75% or greater percent density (proportion of the total breast area that appears dense on the mammogram) are at 4- to 6-fold greater risk of breast cancer compared to women with more fat tissue in the breasts (3, 5, 6). Absolute dense area of the breast that represents epithelium and connective tissue has been shown to be positively associated with breast cancer risk in both pre- and postmenopausal women (7–13), while non-dense area of the breast (representing fat tissue) has been shown to be inversely associated with breast cancer risk (7, 9, 14, 15).
Epidemiologic studies on the association between aspirin use and breast cancer demonstrated inconsistent findings with some studies reporting an inverse association between aspirin and breast cancer (16–22) and others finding no association (23–26). A meta-analysis of 38 studies found that use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) was associated with a 12% reduced risk of breast cancer and in the aspirin-specific analysis, a 13% reduction in breast cancer risk (27). The evidence on the association of aspirin use with breast density is extremely limited (28–30). While Wood et al. found an inverse association between aspirin dose and breast density (30), two other studies reported no associations (31, 32).
A potential biological mechanism through which aspirin may reduce breast density and breast cancer risk is includes inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) enzyme activity (20, 21, 24). Overexpression of COX-2 occurs frequently in women with mammary tumors as compared to women with normal breast tissue (20, 24). COX-2 enzyme mediates the synthesis of prostaglandin E2 (PGE-2) (24), which modulates apoptosis and cell proliferation (20) and may influence endogenous estrogens levels through the stimulation of aromatase (24). Consequently, through the suppression of COX-2, aspirin may lower PGE-2 production, thereby reducing its carcinogenic activity in mammary cells and thus inhibiting tumor growth (20, 24). Finally, a recent study in postmenopausal women suggested that dense breast tissue has a pro-inflammatory microenvironment (33) thus further supporting a potential link between aspirin intake and breast density. To add to the limited evidence on the association between aspirin and mammographic breast density, using Nurses’ Health Study (NHS) and the Nurses’ Health Study II (NHS II) cohorts, we examined associations of aspirin and other NSAIDs intake with percent density, absolute dense and non-dense areas overall and by woman’s menopausal status. We further examined the interactions between the use of anti-inflammatory drugs and percent breast density in relation to breast cancer risk.
Methods
Study population and design
Women included in this study were selected from participants of the nested case-control study within Nurses’ Health Study (NHS) and Nurses’ Health Study II (NHSII) cohorts. These prospective cohorts followed registered nurses in the United States who were 30–55 years (NHS) or 25–42 years old (NHSII) at enrollment. After administration of the initial questionnaire, the information on breast cancer risk factors and any diagnoses of cancer or other diseases was updated through biennial questionnaires (3, 34).
A nested case-control approach was originally used as an efficient design to examine the association between selected biomarkers and breast cancer risk within the NHS and NHS II (3, 35). Using incidence density sampling, women without cancer history (other than non-melanoma skin cancer) at the time of the case’s cancer diagnosis (controls) were matched 1:1 or 1:2 with women diagnosed with in situ or invasive breast cancer (cases) on age at the time of blood collection, menopausal status and postmenopausal hormone use (current vs. not current) at blood draw, and day/time of blood draw; for NHS II, additional matching included race/ethnicity and day in the luteal phase (36). We attempted to obtain mammograms closest to the time of blood collection (or ~1997 for those who did not provide blood samples). From all eligible women for this nested case-control study, 6,258 women provided consent and had a usable mammogram for density estimation. Of these women, 4,685 (1,519 cases and 3,166 controls) had data on exposures and important covariates and were included in the analysis of interactions between exposures and breast density in relation to breast cancer risk.
Our analysis of anti-inflammatory drugs and breast density included only controls from this nested case-control study as well as additional eligible women within NHSII cohort (without a history of any cancer other than non-melanoma skin) who were not included in the original nested breast cancer case-control study. Of these controls, 3,675 had data on exposures and important covariates.
The study protocol was approved by the institutional review boards of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and those of participating registries as required. Consent was obtained or implied by return of questionnaires.
Assessment of aspirin intake and NSAIDs
The methods of assessing exposure to aspirin and other NSAIDs have been described in detail elsewhere (26). Briefly, information on aspirin use in NHSI was first obtained in 1980 and biennially thereafter except in 1986. In 1980, participants were asked whether they currently took aspirin in most weeks and, if yes, what was the weekly amount and years of aspirin use. Information on aspirin dose and frequency of use was also collected beginning in 1982 and 1984, respectively. In NHSII, on the baseline questionnaire in 1989, participants were asked if they regularly (≥2 times per week) used aspirin, or other anti-inflammatory drugs in three separate questions and this was updated biennially from 1993. Beginning in 1993 (for aspirin) or 1995 (for other anti-inflammatory drugs), women were asked to report frequency of use (categorized as either days per week or days per month). Beginning in 1999, participants were additionally asked about quantity used (tablets per week) in each category.
Women were classified as current users at each questionnaire in which current use was reported and were considered current users for the subsequent two-year follow-up period (or the four-year follow-up period from 1989−1993). For participants who missed a questionnaire, drug use information was carried forward from the previous cycle. The women who ceased reporting use were classified as past users, but they were eligible to become current users in subsequent follow-up years. Women were classified as nonusers if they did not report analgesic use at baseline or on any of their follow-up questionnaires. Duration of use of each drug was calculated from baseline (1980 for aspirin, 1990 for other NSAIDs for NHSI and 1989 for NHSII) to the reference date (date of the mammogram) (26). To better represent long-term use, we calculated the cumulative average dose (standard 325-mg tablet) and frequency (days per week) for each woman who was classified as a past or current user as the average of current use and all previous follow-up cycles. Status, quantity and frequency of use were carried forward one cycle to replace missing data and cumulative average quantity, cumulative average frequency and duration of use were calculated from these variables with the carried-forward data.
Assessment of Mammographic Breast Density
To quantify mammographic density, the craniocaudal views of both breasts for all mammograms in the NHS and for the first two batches of mammograms in the NHSII were digitized at 261 μm per pixel with a Lumisys 85 laser film scanner (Lumisys, Sunnyvale, California). The third batch of NHSII mammograms was digitized using a VIDAR CAD PRO Advantage scanner (VIDAR Systems Corporation; Herndon, VA) and comparable resolution of 150 dots per inch and 12 bit depth). The Cumulus software (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) was used for computer-assisted determination of the absolute dense area, non-dense area, and percent mammographic density on all mammograms (3, 37). As reported previously, the measure of breast density from NHS mammograms was highly reproducible (within-person intraclass correlation coefficient=0.93) (3). All NHSII images were read by a single reader. Although within batch reproducibility was high (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.90) (7), density measures varied across the NHSII batches. We included a small subset of identical mammograms in all batches to account for batch drift in density measurement readings. The density measures from the second and third batches of NHSII mammograms were adjusted to account for the batch effect (whether due to intra-reader variability or scanner), as previously described (38). Additionally, to assess the potential variability in percent density by scanner, we conducted a pilot study of 50 mammograms. These mammograms were scanned using both the Lumysis 85 laser scanner and the VIDAR CAD PRO Advantage scanner; percent density was measured by the same observer using Cumulus. The correlation between percent density as measured by the two scanners was 0.88; the mean difference was 2.3% points (39).
Percent breast density was measured as percentage of the total area occupied by epithelial/stromal tissue (absolute dense area) divided by the total breast area. Because breast densities of the right and left breast for an individual woman are strongly correlated (37), the average density of both breasts was used in this analysis.
Covariate Information
Information on breast cancer risk factors was obtained from the biennial questionnaires closest to the date of the mammogram. Women were considered to be postmenopausal if they reported: 1) no menstrual periods within the 12 months before blood collection with natural menopause, 2) bilateral oophorectomy, or 3) hysterectomy with one or both ovaries retained, and were 54 years or older for ever smokers or 56 years or older for never smokers (40, 41).
Statistical analysis
We used generalized linear regression to examine the associations of anti-inflammatory drug use with percent density, absolute dense and non-dense areas. Because density measures were non-normally distributed, we used square root transformation to improve normality in all the regression analyses. The regression estimates were adjusted for age (continuous), body mass index (continuous), age at menarche (<12, 12–13, >13 years), parity and age at first child’s birth (nulliparous, parous with age at first birth <25 years, or parous with age at first birth of ≥25 years), a confirmed history of benign breast disease (yes, no), a family history of breast cancer (yes, no), study cohort, alcohol use (0, <5, ≥5 g/day), and age at menopause (<46, 46-<50, 50-<55, ≥55, unknown). To assess the overall trend for exposure, we used respective medians within each category, where appropriate. The overall analysis was followed by stratified analysis by women’s menopausal status.
We used unconditional logistic regression to assess interactions of exposures with percent breast density in relation to breast cancer risk by including an interaction term in the logistic regression models. The regression estimates were adjusted for all covariates listed above. Differences in the associations of breast density with breast cancer risk by the level of exposures was tested with two-way interactions and using Wald Chi-square test. In modeling these interactions, we first determined the median percent density within each category and respective medians within each category of exposure among controls which were then used to model interactions. Next, we described associations of exposures with breast cancer risk stratified by the category of percent density (<10%, 10–24%, 25–49%, and ≥50%), consistently used in previous studies (42–47).
Statistical significance in all the analyses was assessed at 0.05 level. The analyses were performed using SAS software (version 9.2, SAS Institute, Cary, NC, USA).
Results
Association of anti-inflammatory medication use with breast density
In this study of 3,675 cancer-free women, the average age at the mammogram was 53 years (range 30–84). Of these women, 1,693 were premenopausal and 1,982 were postmenopausal. Among premenopausal women, 51.2% never used aspirin, 21.4% were past users and 27.3% were currently using aspirin while 30.0% never used other NSAIDs and 23.0% and 47.0% were past or current users, respectively. Among postmenopausal women, 24.3% never used aspirin, 30.4% used it in the past and 45.4% were current users while 44.4% never used other NSAIDs and 16.7% and 38.9% were past or current users, respectively. Distribution of breast cancer risk factors by aspirin intake categories in pre- and postmenopausal women are presented in Table 1. In premenopausal women, current aspirin users as compared to non-users had a slightly greater percent breast density (40.1% vs. 38.9%), a greater absolute dense area (48.9 vs. 43.9 cm2) and a greater non-dense breast area (84.2 vs. 78.5 cm2). Current aspirin users were also on average older at the time of the mammogram as compared to non-users (47.5 vs. 44.8 years), consumed greater amount of alcohol (5.7 vs. 4.1 g/day), were less likely to be nulliparous (10% vs. 15%), and less likely to have a history of confirmed benign breast disease (17% vs. 19%). In postmenopausal women, current aspirin users had a slightly larger absolute dense area (37.3 vs. 35.3 cm2) and a larger non-dense area (133.1 vs. 123.1 cm2). As compared to non-user, current aspirin users were older at the time of the mammogram (59.3 vs. 54.6 years), consumed greater amount of alcohol (5.7 vs. 4.8 g/day), and were less likely to be nulliparous (8% vs. 10%). Distributions of other risk factors were similar across aspirin intake categories in both pre- and postmenopausal women.
Table 1.
Age-adjusted characteristics of women in the study (NHS and NHSII) at the time of the mammogram, by aspirin intake
| Characteristic | Premenopausal women | Postmenopausal women | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Non-users (n=867) | Past users (n=363) | Current users (n=463) | Non-users (n=481) | Past users (n=602) | Current users (n=899) | |
| Mean (SD) | ||||||
| Percent mammographic density | 38.9 (18.2) | 39.4 (19.3) | 40.1 (19.3) | 25.7 (18.1) | 26.2 (17.9) | 25.3 (17.7) |
| Dense area (cm2) | 43.9 (25.7) | 45.2 (26.3) | 48.9 (30.6) | 35.3 (26.4) | 37.4 (27.8) | 37.3 (28.5) |
| Non-dense area (cm2) | 78.5 (50.5) | 82.1 (59.2) | 84.2 (57.6) | 123.1 (71.1) | 128.6 (79.2) | 133.1 (80.7) |
| Age (years)* | 44.8 (4.4) | 46.7 (4.1) | 47.5 (4.2) | 54.6 (8.2) | 58.8 (7.4) | 59.3 (7.6) |
| Age at menarche (years) | 12.5 (1.4) | 12.2 (1.3) | 12.5 (1.4) | 12.5 (1.4) | 12.5 (1.5) | 12.4 (1.4) |
| Age at menopause (years) | - | - | - | 47.4 (5.9) | 47.6 (5.9) | 47.4 (6.2) |
| Body Mass Index (kg/m2) | 25.7 (5.4) | 25.6 (6.2) | 25.6 (5.2) | 26.4 (5.6) | 26.2 (5.2) | 26.0 (5.2) |
| Alcohol consumption, g/day | 4.1 (7.1) | 4.1 (6.2) | 5.7 (9.3) | 4.8 (8.8) | 4.8 (8.2) | 5.7 (8.7) |
| Percentages | ||||||
| Parity/age at first birth | 26.2 (4.3) | 26.1 (4.3) | 25.9 (4.2) | 25.0 (3.5) | 25.1 (3.6) | 25.0 (3.2) |
| Nulliparous | 15 | 15 | 10 | 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Parous, age<25 years | 32 | 34 | 36 | 44 | 46 | 49 |
| Parous, age≥25 years | 52 | 51 | 53 | 44 | 44 | 43 |
| Family history of breast cancer | 10 | 7 | 9 | 13 | 12 | 12 |
| Benign breast disease | 19 | 16 | 17 | 21 | 23 | 22 |
| Never used HT | - | - | - | 38 | 35 | 36 |
| Past HT use | - | - | - | 18 | 19 | 19 |
| Current HT use | - | - | - | 44 | 45 | 45 |
Abbreviations: SD – standard deviation; HT – postmenopausal hormone therapy
Value not age adjusted
In the multivariate regression analysis, we did not find any consistent patterns in associations of aspirin and other NSAIDs with percent breast density in overall as well as stratified analysis by menopausal status (Table 2). None of these medications were associated with absolute dense area in the overall analysis and among postmenopausal women (Supplementary table 1). In premenopausal women, current use of aspiring for less than 5 years was positively associated with absolute dense area (β=0.51, 95% CI 0.20, 0.82), however, the overall trend did not reach statistical significance (p-trend=0.11) and was lacking a clear pattern. Similarly, the suggestive decrease in absolute dense area change with increasing dosage of aspirin use among past users was only marginally significant (p-trend=0.09). Use of aspirin and other NSAIDs were not associated with non-dense area neither in overall nor in stratified analysis by menopausal status (Supplemental table 2).
Table 2.
Associations of aspirin and other NSAIDs with mammographic percent breast density (square root-transformed), by menopausal status
| Intake category | All women | Premenopausal | Postmenopausal | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | Full Models, β and 95% CIa | N | Full Models, β and 95% CIb | N | Full Models, β and 95% CIc |
|
| ASPIRIN USE | ||||||
| Regular use (≥2 times/week) | ||||||
| Non-users | 1348 | Reference | 867 | Reference | 481 | Reference |
| Past users | 965 | 363 | 0.10 (−0.07, 0.28) | 602 | 0.12 (−0.07, 0.32) | |
| Current users | ||||||
| <5 yrs | 339 | 0.28 (0.11, 0.46) | 177 | 0.43 (0.20, 0.65) | 162 | 0.09 (−0.19, 0.37) |
| ≥5 yrs | 1023 | 0.06 (−0.08, 0.20) | 286 | 0.02 (−0.19, 0.23) | 737 | 0.03 (−0.16, 0.22) |
| p-trend | 0.25 | 0.11 | 0.88 | |||
| Frequency of use | ||||||
| Non-users | 1343 | Reference | 862 | Reference | 481 | Reference |
| Past users | 1072 | 0.14 (0.01, 0.27) | 389 | 0.15 (−0.03, 0.33) | 683 | 0.12 (−0.07, 0.31) |
| Current users | ||||||
| 1 day/wk | 632 | 0.21 (0.05, 0.36) | 264 | 0.31 (0.09, 0.52) | 368 | 0.09 (−0.14, 0.31) |
| 2–3 days/wk | 310 | 0.08 (−0.11, 0.28) | 114 | 0.06 (−0.22, 0.34) | 196 | 0.05 (−0.22, 0.31) |
| 4–5 days/wk | 142 | 0.10 (−0.16, 0.37) | 37 | 0.16 (−0.31, 0.63) | 105 | 0.01 (−0.33,0.34) |
| 6+ days/wk | 457 | 0.10 (−0.07, 0.27) | 107 | 0.13 (−0.16, 0.42) | 350 | 0.04 (−0.18, 0.27) |
| p-trend | 0.61 | 0.68 | 0.84 | |||
| Dosage (number of tablets per week) | ||||||
| Non-users | 759 | Reference | 390 | Reference | 369 | Reference |
| Past users | ||||||
| <2 | 410 | 0.23 (0.02, 0.43) | 108 | 0.22 (−0.14, 0.59) | 302 | 0.22 (−0.03, 0.46) |
| 2–5 | 124 | 0.35 (0.05, 0.66) | 24 | 0.30 (−0.34, 0.94) | 100 | 0.33 (−0.02, 0.69) |
| >5 | 87 | −0.07 (−0.42, 0.29) | 13 | −0.86 (−1.71, −0.01) | 74 | 0.07 (−0.32, 0.47) |
| p-trend | 0.54 | 0.08 | 0.75 | |||
| Current users | ||||||
| <2 | 450 | 0.25 (0.05, 0.44) | 154 | 0.42 (0.11, 0.73) | 296 | 0.13 (−0.12, 0.37) |
| 2–5 | 332 | 0.20 (−0.01, 0.42) | 65 | −0.02 (−0.44, 0.40) | 267 | 0.22 (−0.04, 0.48) |
| >5 | 379 | 0.01 (−0.19, 0.21) | 100 | 0.23 (−0.12, 0.58) | 279 | −0.13 (−0.38, 0.12) |
| p-trend | 0.48 | 0.62 | 0.16 | |||
| Duration (years of use by status) | ||||||
| Non-users | 1348 | Reference | 867 | Reference | 481 | Reference |
| Past users | ||||||
| <2 | 36 | −0.03 (−0.51, 0.46) | 17 | 0.02 (−0.65, 0.68) | 19 | −0.09 (−0.80, 0.62) |
| 2–5 | 433 | 0.19 (0.03, 0.35) | 215 | 0.20 (−0.01, 0.41) | 218 | 0.16 (−0.09, 0.40) |
| >5 | 496 | 0.08 (−0.09, 0.25) | 131 | −0.06 (−0.34, 0.21) | 365 | 0.12 (−0.10, 0.35) |
| p-trend | 0.55 | 0.85 | 0.54 | |||
| Current users | ||||||
| <2 | 142 | 0.15 (−0.10, 0.41) | 81 | 0.35 (0.03, 0.66) | 61 | −0.14 (−0.55, 0.27) |
| 2–5 | 253 | 0.29 (0.09, 0.49) | 126 | 0.37 (0.11, 0.64) | 127 | 0.15 (−0.15, 0.46) |
| >5 | 967 | 0.06 (−0.08, 0.20) | 256 | 0.01 (−0.21, 0.23) | 711 | 0.04 (−0.15, 0.24) |
| p-trend | 0.48 | 0.91 | 0.47 | |||
| NSAIDs | ||||||
| Regular use (≥2 times/week) | ||||||
| Non-users | 1310 | Reference | 479 | Reference | 831 | Reference |
| Past users | 680 | 0.05 (−0.09, 0.19) | 367 | −0.07 (−0.26, 0.13) | 313 | 0.14 (−0.07, 0.35) |
| Current users | ||||||
| <5 yrs | 877 | 0.03 (−0.10, 0.15) | 436 | −0.04 (−0.22, 0.13) | 441 | 0.06 (−0.12, 0.24) |
| ≥5 yrs | 599 | 0.03 (−0.12, 0.18) | 313 | −0.10 (−0.30, 0.11) | 286 | 0.14 (−0.09, 0.36) |
| p-trend | 0.71 | 0.41 | 0.29 | |||
| Frequency of use | ||||||
| Non-users | 1301 | Reference | 471 | Reference | 830 | Reference |
| Past users | 678 | 0.06 (−0.09, 0.20) | 365 | −0.05 (−0.24, 0.15) | 313 | 0.13 (−0.08, 0.34) |
| Current users | ||||||
| 1 day/wk | 566 | 0.12 (−0.03, 0.27) | 337 | −0.00 (−0.20, 0.19) | 229 | 0.20 (−0.03, 0.43) |
| 2–3 days/wk | 429 | 0.02 (−0.15, 0.18) | 255 | 0.01 (−0.20, 0.22) | 174 | −0.02 (−0.28, 0.23) |
| 4–5 days/wk | 131 | 0.00 (−0.26, 0.27) | 59 | −0.15 (−0.53, 0.22) | 72 | 0.12 (−0.25, 0.50) |
| 6+ days/wk | 274 | −0.07 (−0.27, 0.12) | 74 | −0.31 (−0.65, 0.03) | 200 | 0.02 (−0.22, 0.27) |
| p-trend | 0.50 | 0.21 | 0.98 | |||
| ANY NSAIDs use | ||||||
| Regular use (≥2 times/week) | ||||||
| Non-users | 602 | Reference | 287 | Reference | 315 | Reference |
| Past users | 892 | 0.01 (−0.15, 0.16) | 432 | −0.09 (−0.31, 0.12) | 460 | 0.11 (−0.11, 0.33) |
| Current users | ||||||
| <5 yrs | 895 | 0.05 (−0.10, 0.21) | 466 | 0.01 (−0.20, 0.22) | 429 | 0.09 (−0.13, 0.32) |
| ≥5 yrs | 1528 | 0.00 (−0.14, 0.14) | 569 | −0.08 (−0.28, 0.13) | 959 | 0.06 (−0.14, 0.26) |
| p-trend | 0.93 | 0.73 | 0.84 | |||
Abbreviations: CI- confidence interval; NSAIDs-non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs
Adjusted for age (continuous), BMI (continuous), age at menarche (<12, 12, 13, >13), menopausal status/postmenopausal hormone use (premenopausal, postmenopausal/no hormones, postmenopausal/past hormones, postmenopausal/current hormones, postmenopausal/past/ unknown current), a family history of breast cancer (Yes/No), a history of benign breast disease (Yes/No), NHS cohort (NHSI, NHSII), alcohol use (none, >0-<5, ≥5 g/day), and parity and age at first child’s birth (nulliparous, parous with age at first birth <25, parous with age at first birth ≥25)
Adjusted for age (continuous), BMI (continuous), age at menarche (<12, 12, 13, >13), a family history of breast cancer (Yes/No), a history of benign breast disease (Yes/No), NHS cohort (NHSI, NHSII), alcohol use (none, >0-<5, ≥5 g/day), and parity and age at first child’s birth (nulliparous, parous with age at first birth <25, parous with age at first birth ≥25)
Adjusted for age (continuous), BMI (continuous), , age at menarche (<12, 12, 13, >13), a family history of breast cancer (Yes/No), a history of benign breast disease (Yes/No), NHS cohort (NHSI, NHSII), alcohol use (none, >0-<5, ≥5 g/day), hormone therapy (none, past, current, past/unknown current), age at menopause (<46, 46-<50, 50-<55, ≥55, unknown), and parity and age at first child’s birth (nulliparous, parous with age at first birth <25, parous with age at first birth ≥25)
Interactions of anti-inflammatory medications use with percent breast density in relation to breast cancer risk
The analysis of interactions included 4,685 women (1,519 cases and 3,166 controls). We found no significant interactions between anti-inflammatory medications and percent breast density in relation to breast cancer risk with exemption of any use of anti-inflammatory medication (p-interaction<0.0001; all other p-values>0.05). There were also marginally significant interactions between breast density and dosage of past aspirin use (p-interaction=0.08) and between breast density and frequency of NSAIDs use (p-interaction=0.08). No clear differences were observed in the magnitude of the risk estimates for anti-inflammatory drugs in relation to breast cancer risk across percent breast density strata.
In a stratified analysis by the degree of percent breast density, positive associations with breast cancer risk were found among women with 10–24% breast density for regular aspirin use: (past use: OR=1.56, 95% CI 1.03–2.35; current aspirin use <5 years: OR=1.82, 95% CI 1.01–3.28); current aspirin use ≥5 years: OR=1.89, 95% CI 1.26– 2.82), dosage of past aspirin use ( use of 5 or more tablets per week: OR=2.55, 95% CI 1.18–5.54), duration of current aspirin use (use for 2–5 years: OR=1.97, 95% CI 1.02–3.82); use for >5 years: OR=1.84, 95% CI 1.22–2.77), and current use of any NSAIDs for 5 or more years (OR=1.67, 95% CI 1.06–2.65) (Table 3). In stratified analysis, it also appeared that some of the associations might be in opposite directions in women with 10–24% breast density vs. dense breasts (≥50%) (Table 3).
Table 3.
Associations of aspirin and other NSAIDs with breast cancer risk, stratified by percent densitya
| Intake category | <10 | 10–24 | 25–49 | ≥ 50 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N (Cases/Controls) | Full Models, OR and 95% CIa | N (Cases/Controls) | Full Models, OR and 95% CIb | N (Cases/Controls) | Full Models, OR and 95% CIc | N (Cases/Controls) | Full Models, OR and 95% CId | |
| ASPIRIN USE | ||||||||
| Regular use (≥2 times/week) | ||||||||
| Non-users | 18/95 | Reference | 53/274 | Reference | 193/477 | Reference | 153/256 | Reference |
| Past users | 64/175 | 1.57 (0.85, 2.91) | 112/284 | 1.56 (1.03, 2.35) | 213/332 | 1.12 (0.85, 1.48) | 129/155 | 1.09 (0.77, 1.53) |
| Current users | ||||||||
| <5 yrs | 8/24 | 1.56 (0.57, 4.23) | 23/57 | 1.82 (1.01, 3.28) | 39/90 | 0.96 (0.63, 1.46) | 28/57 | 0.82 (0.49, 1.38) |
| ≥5 yrs | 50/196 | 1.06 (0.56, 2.00) | 147/298 | 1.89 (1.26, 2.82) | 191/279 | 1.05 (0.78, 1.42) | 98/117 | 0.93 (0. 62, 1.38) |
| p-trend | 0.40 | 0.00 | 1.00 | 0.49 | ||||
| Frequency of use | ||||||||
| Non-users | 18/94 | Reference | 53/261 | Reference | 193/443 | Reference | 152/240 | Reference |
| Past users | 73/193 | 1.70 (0.93, 3.12) | 133/321 | 1.56 (1.05, 2.34) | 256/371 | 1.11 (0.85, 1.45) | 144/172 | 1.00 (0.71, 1.41) |
| Current users | ||||||||
| 1 day/wk | 16/56 | 1.37 (0.62, 3.04) | 37/71 | 2.16 (1.27, 3.68) | 60/95 | 1.09 (0.73, 1.62) | 36/55 | 0.73 (0.43, 1.23) |
| 2–3 days/wk | 12/28 | 1.83 (0.75, 4.47) | 31/53 | 2.36 (1.34, 4.16) | 54/86 | 1.06 (0.70, 1.59) | 24/39 | 0.68 (0.38, 1.23) |
| 4–5 days/wk | 6/39 | 0.70 (0.25, 1.97) | 23/55 | 1.71 (0.93, 3.13) | 25/41 | 0.91 (0.52, 1.60) | 19/24 | 1.00 (0.51, 1.96) |
| 6+ days/wk | 41/128 | 1.35 (0.70, 2.62) | 95/217 | 1.52 (1.00, 2.32) | 121/187 | 0.89 (0.64, 1.24) | 65/66 | 1.13 (0.72, 1.77) |
| p-trend | 0.54 | 0.56 | 0.21 | 0.35 | ||||
| Dosage (number of tablets per week) | ||||||||
| Non-users | 18/85 | Reference | 49/205 | Reference | 178/327 | Reference | 127/181 | Reference |
| Past users | ||||||||
| <2 | 35/82 | 1.78 (0.89, 3.58) | 57/165 | 1.28 (0.79, 2.08) | 105/142 | 1.02 (0.71, 1.47) | 58/48 | 1.31 (0.76, 2.26) |
| 2–5 | 11/44 | 0.86 (0.35, 2.09) | 27/52 | 1.82 (0.99, 3.35) | 27/47 | 0.76 (0.44, 1.32) | 16/21 | 0.88 (0.40, 1.91) |
| >5 | 11/23 | 1.94 (0.75, 4.98) | 16/22 | 2.55 (1.18, 5.54) | 24/30 | 1.02 (0.55, 1.90) | 8/9 | 0.80 (0.28, 2.33) |
| p-trend | 0.70 | 0.01 | 0.91 | 0.27 | ||||
| Current users | ||||||||
| <2 | 22/60 | 1.53 (0.72, 3.26) | 58/105 | 2.05 (1.27, 3.30) | 75/118 | 0.94 (0.64, 1.37) | 51/67 | 0.92 (0.57, 1.48) |
| 2–5 | 11/71 | 0.58 (0.24, 1.37) | 45/118 | 1.30 (0.78, 2.16) | 81/100 | 1.06 (0.71, 1.58) | 27/41 | 0.63 (0.34, 1.16) |
| >5 | 25/80 | 1.17 (0.56, 2.44) | 62/112 | 2.02 (1.25, 3.28) | 66/110 | 0.80 (0.54, 1.18) | 35/41 | 0.81 (0.46, 1.44) |
| p-trend | 0.87 | 0.07 | 0.32 | 0.54 | ||||
| Duration (years of use by status) | ||||||||
| Non-users | 18/95 | Reference | 53/274 | Reference | 193/477 | Reference | 153/256 | Reference |
| Past users | ||||||||
| <2 | 2/3 | 3.01 (0.43, 20.92) | 4/10 | 1.74 (0.51, 5.97) | 10/7 | 2.93 (1.07, 8.02) | 9/3 | 5.90 (1.50, 23.18) |
| 2–5 | 15/53 | 1.47 (0.66, 3.25) | 30/79 | 1.60 (0.94, 2.74) | 79/141 | 1.12 (0.80, 1.57) | 48/82 | 0.86 (0.56, 1.32) |
| >5 | 47/119 | 1.58 (0.82, 3.04) | 78/195 | 1.51 (0.96, 2.37) | 124/184 | 1.02 (0.73, 1.43) | 72/70 | 1.13 (0.71, 1.78) |
| p-trend | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.84 | 0.77 | ||||
| Current users | ||||||||
| <2 | 2/13 | 0.78 (0.15, 3.90) | 9/23 | 1.92 (0.82, 4.53) | 17/44 | 0.91 (0.50, 1.66) | 11/25 | 0.87 (0.41, 1.85) |
| 2–5 | 7/14 | 2.44 (0.81, 7.34) | 18/38 | 1.97 (1.02, 3.82) | 30/56 | 1.11 (0.68, 1.82) | 24/38 | 0.95 (0.54, 1.69) |
| >5 | 49/193 | 1.04 (0.55, 1.98) | 143/294 | 1.84 (1.22, 2.77) | 183/269 | 1.00 (0.73, 1.36) | 91/111 | 0.87 (0.57, 1.32) |
| p-trend | 0.57 | 0.02 | 0.55 | 0.83 | ||||
| NSAIDs | ||||||||
| Regular use (≥2 times/week) Non-users |
65/214 | Reference | 124/344 | Reference | 241/431 | Reference | 145/188 | Reference |
| Past users | 44/126 | 1.15 (0.72, 1.84) | 111/250 | 1.19 (0.86, 1.65) | 203/315 | 1.17 (0.91, 1.51) | 134/165 | 1.10 (0.79, 1.54) |
| Current users | ||||||||
| <5 yrs | 23/97 | 0.85 (0.49, 1.48) | 47/158 | 1.01 (0.67, 1.52) | 114/234 | 0.98 (0.73, 1.30) | 67/116 | 0.75 (0.50, 1.10) |
| ≥5 yrs | 33/101 | 1.32 (0.78, 2.25) | 93/244 | 1.16 (0.81, 1.65) | 153/297 | 0.98 (0.75, 1.29) | 98/146 | 0.86 (0.59, 1.25) |
| p-trend | 0.56 | 0.57 | 0.68 | 0.16 | ||||
| Frequency of use | ||||||||
| Non-users | 65/211 | Reference | 124/331 | Reference | 241/379 | Reference | 144/171 | Reference |
| Past users | 44/126 | 1.16 (0.72, 1.84) | 111/248 | 1.14 (0.82, 1.57) | 206/315 | 1.07 (0.83, 1.38) | 134/162 | 1.02 (0.72, 1.43) |
| Current users | ||||||||
| 1 day/wk | 9/49 | 0.71 (0.32, 1.56) | 30/107 | 0.91 (0.56, 1.49) | 84/167 | 0.96 (0.69, 1.32) | 62/104 | 0.73 (0.48, 1.10) |
| 2–3 days/wk | 11/44 | 1.10 (0.52, 2.34) | 25/113 | 0.67 (0.40, 1.13) | 73/172 | 0.76 (0.55, 1.07) | 63/75 | 1.02 (0.66, 1.57) |
| 4–5 days/wk | 6/12 | 2.26 (0.78, 6.57) | 19/35 | 1.70 (0.90, 3.21) | 25/44 | 0.90 (0.53, 1.53) | 17/25 | 0.81 (0.41, 1.60) |
| 6+ days/wk | 26/65 | 1.41 (0.79, 2.50) | 44/87 | 1.32 (0.84, 2.05) | 56/77 | 1.05 (0.71, 1.56) | 17/29 | 0.54 (0.27, 1.05) |
| p-trend | 0.12 | 0.13 | 0.82 | 0.25 | ||||
| ANY NSAIDs use | ||||||||
| Regular use (≥2 times/week) | ||||||||
| Non-users | 16/64 | Reference | 28/129 | Reference | 102/199 | Reference | 67/89 | Reference |
| Past users | 52/130 | 1.41 (0.72, 2.75) | 93/245 | 1.45 (0.89, 2.36) | 196/332 | 1.03 (0.76, 1.40) | 131/161 | 1.04 (0.69, 1.58) |
| Current users | ||||||||
| <5 yrs | 21/82 | 0.96 (0.45, 2.07) | 48/148 | 1.49 (0.87, 2.57) | 104/238 | 0.88 (0.62, 1.24) | 72/128 | 0.74 (0.47, 1.16) |
| ≥5 yrs | 76/267 | 1.05 (0.55, 1.99) | 208/478 | 1.67 (1.06, 2.65) | 313/512 | 0.98 (0.73, 1.31) | 176/240 | 0.78 (0.52, 1.16) |
| p-trend | 0.46 | 0.04 | 0.68 | 0.06 | ||||
Abbreviations: CI –confidence interval; OR-odds ratio; NSAIDs – non-steroid anti-inflammatory drugs
Adjusted for age (continuous), BMI (continuous), age at menarche (<12, 12, 13, >13), a family history of breast cancer (Yes/No), a history of benign breast disease (Yes/No), NHS cohort (NHSI, NHSII), alcohol use (none, >0-<5, ≥5 g/day), menopausal status/postmenopausal hormone use (premenopausal, postmenopausal/no hormones, postmenopausal/past hormones, postmenopausal/current hormones, postmenopausal/past/ unknown current) and parity and age at first child’s birth (nulliparous, parous with age at first birth <25, parous with age at first birth ≥25)
NOTE: Interaction of percent breast density with: regular aspirin use p=0.26; frequency of aspirin use p=0.67; dosage of past aspirin use p=0.08; dosage of current aspirin use p=0.30; duration of past aspirin use p=0.19; duration of current aspirin use p=0.37; regular NSAID use p=0.39; frequency of NSAIDs use p=0.08; regular use of any anti-inflammatory medications p<0.0001
Discussion
In this study of associations of anti-inflammatory drug use, mammographic breast density and interactions of breast density with medications in relation to breast cancer risk, we found no associations of aspirin or NSAIDs with percent density, absolute dense and non-dense areas, overall and by woman’s menopausal status. Positive associations of regular aspirin use, dosage of past aspirin use, and duration of current aspirin with breast cancer risk were limited to women with percent density 10–24%. Our findings contribute to the very limited evidence on the association of anti-inflammatory drug use and breast density.
Some previous studies have suggested that aspirin intake may be associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer and breast cancer-specific mortality after primary breast cancer diagnosis (16–22); others found no associations (23–26). The existing evidence on these associations has recently been summarized by a meta-analysis of 38 studies (27). The authors found that use of any NSAIDs was associated with a 12% reduced risk of breast cancer (relative risk [RR]=0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84– 0.93). In medication-specific analysis, aspirin use was associated with a 13% reduction in breast cancer risk (RR=0.87, 95% CI 0.82–0.92) and use of ibuprofen with 21% risk reduction (RR=0.79, 95% CI 0.64–0.97) (27). Two studies of associations between anti-inflammatory medication and breast cancer in NHS and NHSII found no associations in both pre- and postmenopausal women (26, 48). No differences were noted in associations for specific breast cancer subtypes (48).
Several biological mechanisms were suggested as a possible explanation for potential effects of aspirin and other anti-inflammatory medications on breast cancer risk, including inhibition of COX-2 enzyme activity (20, 21, 24) that could subsequently lead to changes in apoptosis, cellular proliferation and aromatase activity (20, 24) However, very limited data exists on associations of anti-inflammatory medications with breast density (28–30). A recent study of 26,000 women undergoing screening mammography found an inverse association between aspirin use (within the year preceding the mammogram) and breast density defined using Breast Imaging-Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density (p-trend< 0.001). Women with extremely dense breasts (BI-RADS IV) were less likely to have used aspirin as compared to women with scattered fibroglandular density (BI-RADS II, OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.57–0.93), with an apparent dose-response pattern (p-trend=0.007) (30). In contrast to this study, due to prospective data collection in NHS and NHSII, we were able to examine the associations of cumulative, long-term exposures with breast density. In addition, we used continuous breast density measures from computerized breast density estimation in our analyses. Unlike Woods et al., we did not find any associations of any of the medications with percent breast density, absolute dense and non-dense areas. Differences in breast density assessment approaches, study size (3,675 in our study vs. 26,000 in Woods et al.), and exposure assessment could potentially explain these differences in study findings. Consistent with our findings, two other studies (a cross-sectional analysis by Stone et al. within Australian Mammographic Density Twins and Sisters Study [AMDTSS] and the Genes Behind Endometriosis Study [3,286 women] and a randomized controlled trial by McTiernan et al.[143 postmenopausal women]) found no associations of aspirin and NSAIDs with breast density (31, 32).
We did not observe any clear differences in associations of anti-inflammatory drugs with breast cancer risk across percent breast density strata, though it appeared that some of the associations might be in opposite directions in women with 10–24% breast density vs. dense breasts (≥50%). However, we cannot rule out completely that this is a chance finding. As NSAIDs reduce aromatase activity (49) and as dense breast tissue appears to have greater activity of aromatase as compared to non-dense area (50) it is possible that the effect of aspirin on breast cancer risk may be modified by the degree of breast density. However, we were unable to find any significant interactions between anti-inflammatory drugs and breast density and further studies are warranted to examine these suggestive association patterns in a larger study sample.
Our study used data from the NHS and NHSII cohorts with more than 25 years of follow-up, ascertainment of disease status, and comprehensive information on breast cancer risk factors and breast density. Our study has a few limitations. The examined associations are based on the density measures from a single mammogram which might not be reflective of the woman’s life-long density pattern, however studies have suggested that a single measure can predict breast cancer risk for up to 10 years in both pre- and postmenopausal women (6, 51). Despite the prospective nature of the cohort, potential errors in recall of aspirin and other medication use are possible. However, given our population of registered nurses with a familiarity of health-related exposures and use of drugs as well as prospective data collection, the medication use data are likely to be accurate.
In conclusion, we investigated the associations of aspirin and NSAIDs use with mammographic breast density. Our findings suggested that anti-inflammatory medications are not associated with percent breast density, absolute dense and non-dense breast area. Even though we found no interactions of aspirin with MBD in relation to breast cancer risk, in women with percent density 10–24%, regular aspirin use, dosage of past aspirin use and duration of current aspirin use appear to be positively associated with breast cancer risk.
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health [CA131332, CA087969, CA175080 to R.M.T., UM1 CA186107 to M.S., U01 CA176726 to W.W], Avon Foundation for Women, Susan G. Komen for the Cure®, and Breast Cancer Research Foundation.
We would like to thank the participants and staff of the NHS and NHSII for their valuable contributions as well as the following state cancer registries for their help: AL, AZ, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, NE, NH, NJ, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SC, TN, TX, VA, WA, WY. The authors assume full responsibility for analyses and interpretation of these data.
Footnotes
Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Research involving Human Participants and/or Animals
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent
The study protocol was approved by the institutional review boards of the Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and those of participating registries as required. Consent was obtained or implied by return of questionnaires.
References:
- 1.Boyd NF, Rommens JM, Vogt K, et al. (2005) Mammographic breast density as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer. Lancet Oncol. 6: 798–808. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Ginsburg OM, Martin LJ, Boyd NF. (2008) Mammographic density, lobular involution, and risk of breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 99: 1369–74. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Tamimi RM, Byrne C, Colditz GA, Hankinson SE. (2007) Endogenous hormone levels, mammographic density, and subsequent risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 99: 1178–87. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Harvey JA, Bovbjerg VE. (2004) Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. Radiology. 230: 29–41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Boyd NF, Byng JW, Jong RA, et al. (1995) Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 87: 670–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolfe J, et al. (1995) Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 87: 1622–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Pettersson A, Hankinson S, Willett W, Lagiou P, Trichopoulos D, Tamimi R. (2011) Nondense mammographic area and risk of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research. 13: R100. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Aitken Z, McCormack VA, Highnam RP, et al. (2010) Screen-Film Mammographic Density and Breast Cancer Risk: A Comparison of the Volumetric Standard Mammogram Form and the Interactive Threshold Measurement Methods. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. 19: 418–28. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Stone J, Ding J, Warren RM, Duffy SW, Hopper JL. (2010) Using mammographic density to predict breast cancer risk: dense area or percentage dense area. Breast Cancer Res. 12: R97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Ursin G, Ma H, Wu AH, et al. (2003) Mammographic Density and Breast Cancer in Three Ethnic Groups. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. 12: 332–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Maskarinec G, Pagano I, Lurie G, Wilkens LR, Kolonel LN. (2005) Mammographic Density and Breast Cancer Risk. American Journal of Epidemiology. 162: 743–52. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Boyd N, Martin L, Gunasekara A, et al. (2009) Mammographic Density and Breast Cancer Risk: Evaluation of a Novel Method of Measuring Breast Tissue Volumes. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. 18: 1754–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Vachon CM, Brandt KR, Ghosh K, et al. (2007) Mammographic Breast Density as a General Marker of Breast Cancer Risk. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. 16: 43–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Lokate M, Peeters PH, Peelen LM, Haars G, Veldhuis WB, van Gils CH. (2011) Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: the role of the fat surrounding the fibroglandular tissue. Breast Cancer Res. 13: R103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Pettersson A, Graff RE, Ursin G, et al. (2014) Mammographic Density Phenotypes and Risk of Breast Cancer: A Meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Bardia A, Olson JE, Vachon CM, et al. (2011) Effect of aspirin and other NSAIDs on postmenopausal breast cancer incidence by hormone receptor status: results from a prospective cohort study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 126: 149–55. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Bosco JL, Palmer JR, Boggs DA, Hatch EE, Rosenberg L. (2011) Regular aspirin use and breast cancer risk in US Black women. Cancer Causes Control. 22: 1553–61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Fraser DM, Sullivan FM, Thompson AM, McCowan C. (2014) Aspirin use and survival after the diagnosis of breast cancer: a population-based cohort study. Br J Cancer. 111: 623–7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Kim S, Shore DL, Wilson LE, et al. (2015) Lifetime use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and breast cancer risk: results from a prospective study of women with a sister with breast cancer. BMC Cancer. 15: 960. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Bardia A, Keenan TE, Ebbert JO, et al. (2016) Personalizing Aspirin Use for Targeted Breast Cancer Chemoprevention in Postmenopausal Women. Mayo Clin Proc. 91: 71–80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Bradley MC, Black A, Freedman AN, Barron TI. (2016) Prediagnostic aspirin use and mortality in women with stage I to III breast cancer: A cohort study in the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial. Cancer. 122: 2067–75. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Clarke CA, Canchola AJ, Moy LM, et al. (2017) Regular and low-dose aspirin, other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications and prospective risk of HER2-defined breast cancer: the California Teachers Study. Breast Cancer Res. 19: 52. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Cook NR, Lee IM, Gaziano JM, et al. (2005) Low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of cancer: the Women’s Health Study: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 294: 47–55. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Zhang X, Smith-Warner SA, Collins LC, Rosner B, Willett WC, Hankinson SE. (2012) Use of aspirin, other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and acetaminophen and postmenopausal breast cancer incidence. J Clin Oncol. 30: 3468–77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Holmes MD, Olsson H, Pawitan Y, et al. (2014) Aspirin intake and breast cancer survival - a nation-wide study using prospectively recorded data in Sweden. BMC Cancer. 14: 391. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Eliassen AH, Chen WY, Spiegelman D, Willett WC, Hunter DJ, Hankinson SE. (2009) Use of aspirin, other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and acetaminophen and risk of breast cancer among premenopausal women in the Nurses’ Health Study II. Archives of Internal Medicine. 169: 115–21. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Takkouche B, Regueira-Mendez C, Etminan M. (2008) Breast cancer and use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 100: 1439–47. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.McTiernan A, Wang CY, Sorensen B, et al. (2009) No effect of aspirin on mammographic density in a randomized controlled clinical trial. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 18: 1524–30. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Stone J, Willenberg L, Apicella C, Treloar S, Hopper J. (2012) The association between mammographic density measures and aspirin or other NSAID use. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 132: 259–66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Wood ME, Sprague BL, Oustimov A, et al. (2017) Aspirin use is associated with lower mammographic density in a large screening cohort. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 162: 419–25. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.McTiernan A, Wang CY, Sorensen B, et al. (2009) No effect of aspirin on mammographic density in a randomized controlled clinical trial. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology. 18: 1524–30. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Stone J, Willenberg L, Apicella C, Treloar S, Hopper J. (2012) The association between mammographic density measures and aspirin or other NSAID use. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 132: 259–66. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Abrahamsson A, Rzepecka A, Romu T, et al. (2016) Dense breast tissue in postmenopausal women is associated with a pro-inflammatory microenvironment in vivo. Oncoimmunology. 5: e1229723. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Colditz GA, Hankinson SE. (2005) The Nurses’ Health Study: lifestyle and health among women. Nature reviews. Cancer. 5: 388–96. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Tworoger SS, Sluss P, Hankinson SE. (2006) Association between plasma prolactin concentrations and risk of breast cancer among predominately premenopausal women. Cancer Res. 66: 2476–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Bertrand KA, Rosner B, Eliassen AH, et al. (2015) Premenopausal plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D, mammographic density, and risk of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 149: 479–87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Byng JW, Boyd NF, Little L, et al. (1996) Symmetry of projection in the quantitative analysis of mammographic images. Eur J Cancer Prev. 5: 319–27. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Bertrand K, Eliassen AH, Hankinson S, et al. (2012) Urinary estrogens and estrogen metabolites and mammographic density in premenopausal women. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 136: 277–87. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Rice MS, Rosner BA, Tamimi RM. (2017) Percent mammographic density prediction: development of a model in the nurses’ health studies. Cancer Causes Control. 28: 677–84. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Willett W, Stampfer MJ, Bain C, et al. (1983) Cigarette smoking, relative weight, and menopause. Am J Epidemiol. 117: 651–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Stampfer MJ, Willett WC, Colditz GA, Rosner B, Speizer FE, Hennekens CH. (1985) A Prospective Study of Postmenopausal Estrogen Therapy and Coronary Heart Disease. New England Journal of Medicine. 313: 1044–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Yaghjyan L, Pettersson A, Colditz GA, et al. (2015) Postmenopausal mammographic breast density and subsequent breast cancer risk according to selected tissue markers. British journal of cancer. 113: 1104–13. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Brisson J, Diorio C, Mâsse Bt. (2003) Wolfe’s Parenchymal Pattern and Percentage of the Breast with Mammographic Densities. Redundant or Complementary Classifications? 12: 728–32. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Yaghjyan L, Colditz GA, Rosner B, Tamimi RM. (2015) Mammographic breast density and breast cancer risk: interactions of percent density, absolute dense, and non-dense areas with breast cancer risk factors. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment. 150: 181–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Lienart V, Carly B, Kang X, Guzy L, Sajovitz A-M, Liebens F. (2014) Effect of Preventive Hormonal Therapy on Breast Density: A Systematic Qualitative Review. The Scientific World Journal. 2014: 942386. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Vachon CM, Kushi LH, Cerhan JR, Kuni CC, Sellers TA. (2000) Association of Diet and Mammographic Breast Density in the Minnesota Breast Cancer Family Cohort. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. 9: 151–60. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Harris HR, Tamimi RM, Willett WC, Hankinson SE, Michels KB. (2011) Body Size Across the Life Course, Mammographic Density, and Risk of Breast Cancer. American Journal of Epidemiology. 174: 909–18. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Zhang X, Smith-Warner SA, Collins LC, Rosner B, Willett WC, Hankinson SE. (2012) Use of aspirin, other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and acetaminophen and postmenopausal breast cancer incidence. Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 30: 3468–77. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Czajka-Oraniec I, Simpson ER. (2010) Aromatase research and its clinical significance. Endokrynol Pol. 61: 126–34. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Yaghjyan L, Colditz GA, Collins LC, et al. (2011) Mammographic breast density and subsequent risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women according to tumor characteristics. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 103: 1179–89. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 51.Yaghjyan L, Colditz GA, Rosner B, Tamimi RM. (2013) Mammographic breast density and subsequent risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women according to the time since the mammogram. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 22: 1110–7. [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.