Table 3.
The association between automated terminal duct lobular unit (TDLU) measures and breast cancer risk was evaluated using unconditional logistic regression models to estimate odd ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).
| Quartile 1 | Quartile 2 | Quartile 3 | Quartile 4 | p-trend | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Median TDLU span | |||||
| Cases/Controls, n | 65/271 | 72/270 | 73/271 | 77/271 | |
| Model 1 | Ref | 1.07 (0.73,1.57) | 0.98 (0.67,1.45) | 0.96 (0.65,1.43) | 0.75 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 0.94 (0.64,1.39) | 0.92 (0.62,1.37) | 0.89 (0.59,1.33) | 0.56 |
| TDLU counts/mm2 | |||||
| Cases/Controls, n | 67/271 | 73/270 | 71/271 | 76/271 | |
| Model 1 | Ref | 1.10 (0.75,1.60) | 1.06 (0.73,1.55) | 1.17 (0.80,1.71) | 0.45 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 1.04 (0.71,1.53) | 0.96 (0.65,1.41) | 1.15 (0.79,1.69) | 0.49 |
| Median acini counts/TDLU | |||||
| Cases/Controls, n | 26/121 | 79/348 | 89/311 | 93/303 | |
| Model 1 | Ref | 1.02 (0.63,1.71) | 1.21 (0.75,2.02) | 1.19 (0.73,1.99) | 0.40 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 0.94 (0.57,1.57) | 1.00 (0.61,1.69) | 1.05 (0.64,1.77) | 0.59 |
| Median TDLU area | |||||
| Cases/Controls, n | 58/271 | 78/270 | 66/271 | 85/271 | |
| Model 1 | Ref | 1.29 (0.88,1.91) | 0.99 (0.66,1.49) | 1.19 (0.79,1.78) | 0.72 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 1.15 (0.78,1.71) | 0.87 (0.57,1.31) | 1.10 (0.73,1.66) | 0.90 |
| % TDLU area (total) | |||||
| Cases/Controls, n | 58/271 | 82/270 | 63/271 | 84/271 | |
| Model 1 | Ref | 1.34 (0.92,1.98) | 0.99 (0.66,1.48) | 1.18 (0.79,1.78) | 0.82 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 1.15 (0.78,1.71) | 0.86 (0.57,1.30) | 1.04 (0.69,1.58) | 0.90 |
| % TDLU area (non-adipose) | |||||
| Cases/Controls, n | 58/271 | 87/270 | 57/271 | 85/271 | |
| Model 1 | Ref | 1.42 (0.97,2.08) | 0.89 (0.59,1.34) | 1.22 (0.82,1.82) | 0.81 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 1.23 (0.84,1.82) | 0.80 (0.52,1.21) | 1.10 (0.73,1.66) | 0.98 |
| Acini counts/mm2 | |||||
| Cases/Controls, n | 64/271 | 71/270 | 69/271 | 83/271 | |
| Model 1 | Ref | 1.09 (0.74,1.61) | 0.99 (0.67,1.47) | 1.10 (0.75,1.63) | 0.72 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 0.98 (0.67,1.45) | 0.86 (0.58,1.29) | 1.03 (0.69,1.53) | 0.83 |
| Median acini density | |||||
| Cases/Controls, n | 57/271 | 89/270 | 61/271 | 80/271 | |
| Model 1 | Ref | 1.59 (1.09,2.33) | 1.08 (0.72,1.62) | 1.33 (0.91,1.96) | 0.49 |
| Model 2 | Ref | 1.54 (1.05,2.27) | 1.05 (0.70,1.58) | 1.36 (0.92,2.01) | 0.41 |
Each quantitative TDLU measure was categorized into quartiles as defined by the distribution among the controls. Model 1 adjusted for matching factors. Model 2 adjusted for matching factors and BBD histological subtypes. The median value for each quartile was included as a continuous variable in the unconditional logistic regression for Model 1 and 2 to obtain the p-trend value (Wald test).