<p>Supplementary table S1. Association of current or recent (stopped NSW <1 before mammogram) Night-shift Work (NSW) and Mammographic Density in DDM-Spain/Var-DDM study.</p>
High mammographic density (MD) is a phenotype risk marker for breast cancer. Body mass index (BMI) is inversely associated with MD, with the breast being a fat storage site. We investigated the influence of abdominal fat distribution and adult weight gain on MD, taking age, BMI and other confounders into account. Because visceral adiposity and BMI are associated with breast cancer only after menopause, differences in pre- and post-menopausal women were also explored. We recruited 3,584 women aged 45-68 years within the Spanish breast cancer screening network. Demographic, reproductive, family and personal history data were collected by purpose-trained staff, who measured current weight, height, waist and hip circumferences under the same protocol and with the same tools. MD was assessed in the left craniocaudal view using Boyd's Semiquantitative Scale. Association between waist-to-hip ratio, adult weight gain (difference between current weight and self-reported weight at 18 years) and MD was quantified by ordinal logistic regression, with random center-specific intercepts. Models were adjusted for age, BMI, breast size, time since menopause, parity, family history of breast cancer and hormonal replacement therapy use. Natural splines were used to describe the shape of the relationship between these two variables and MD. Waist-to-hip ratio was inversely associated with MD, and the effect was more pronounced in pre-menopausal (OR = 0.53 per 0.1 units; 95 % CI = 0.42-0.66) than in post-menopausal women (OR = 0.73; 95 % CI = 0.65-0.82) (P of heterogeneity = 0.010). In contrast, adult weight gain displayed a positive association with MD, which was similar in both groups (OR = 1.17 per 6 kg; 95 % CI = 1.11-1.23). Women who had gained more than 24 kg displayed higher MD (OR = 2.05; 95 % CI = 1.53-2.73). MD was also evaluated using Wolfe's and Tabár's classifications, with similar results being obtained. Once BMI, fat distribution and other confounders were considered, our results showed a clear dose-response gradient between the number of kg gained during adulthood and the proportion of dense tissue in the breast.
A healthy diet is particularly important during menopause, a period in which the risk of a number of health problems increases. This study analyzed diet quality as measured by two indices, namely, the Alternate Healthy Eating Index (AHEI) and the Alternate Mediterranean Diet (aMED) index, which measures adherence to a Mediterranean diet, and examined the factors associated with lower diet quality.This was a cross-sectional study covering 3,564 women aged 45 to 68 years who underwent breast cancer screening at 7 centers (Corunna, Barcelona, Burgos, Palma de Mallorca, Pamplona, Valencia, and Zaragoza). Data on diet were collected using a food frequency questionnaire validated for the Spanish population. We calculated the AHEI out of a total of 80 points and the aMED out of a total of 9 points. Ordinal logistic regression models were fitted, taking diet quality (tertiles of the AHEI and the aMED) as dependent variables. The following were included in the final multivariate models as explanatory variables: sociodemographic characteristics, chronic diseases, and lifestyles that were associated with diet quality, with a P value <0.100 in an initial simple model (adjusted solely for calorie intake and screening center). Interaction between menopause status and the other explanatory variables was checked.The median score for AHEI was 40 of a maximum of 80 points. Lower diet quality was registered by the youngest women (P for trend < 0.001), premenopausal and perimenopausal women (odds ratio [OR], 1.25; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.56; and OR, 1.48; CI, 1.20-1.83, respectively), obese women (OR, 1.18; CI, 0.99-1.41), those with a diagnosis of diabetes (OR, 1.35; CI, 1.01-1.79), smokers (OR, 1.41; CI, 1.21-1.66), and women reporting lower daily physical activity (OR, 1.31; CI, 1.12-1.53). Better diet quality was shown by women with higher education (OR, 0.74; CI, 0.62-0.88) and ex-smokers (OR, 0.82; CI, 0.69-0.98). Nulliparity was associated with higher AHEI scores, but only among premenopausal women (OR, 0.50; CI, 0.32-0.78). aMED index varied between 0 and 9 (median 5). Lower scores were associated with younger age (P for trend < 0.001), low socioeconomic level (OR, 1.13; CI, 0.96-1.33), lower educational level (P for trend = 0.008), and low level of daily physical activity (OR, 1.27, CI, 1.08-1.50).The youngest women, the most sedentary women, and those who had a lower educational level and socioeconomic status registered worse diet quality. Ex-smokers and postmenopausal women obtained better scores, probably reflecting a keener concern about leading a healthy life.
We developed a semi-automated tool to assess mammographic density (MD), a phenotype risk marker for breast cancer (BC), in full-field digital images and evaluated its performance testing its reproducibility, comparing our MD estimates with those obtained by visual inspection and using Cumulus, verifying their association with factors that influence MD, and studying the association between MD measures and subsequent BC risk. Three radiologists assessed MD using DM-Scan, the new tool, on 655 processed images (craniocaudal view) obtained in two screening centers. Reproducibility was explored computing pair-wise concordance correlation coefficients (CCC). The agreement between DM-Scan estimates and visual assessment (semi-quantitative scale, 6 categories) was quantified computing weighted kappa statistics (quadratic weights). DM-Scan and Cumulus readings were compared using CCC. Variation of DM-Scan measures by age, body mass index (BMI) and other MD modifiers was tested in regression mixed models with mammographic device as a random-effect term. The association between DM-Scan measures and subsequent BC was estimated in a case-control study. All BC cases in screening attendants (2007-2010) at a center with full-field digital mammography were matched by age and screening year with healthy controls (127 pairs). DM-Scan was used to blindly assess MD in available mammograms (112 cases/119 controls). Unconditional logistic models were fitted, including age, menopausal status and BMI as confounders. DM-Scan estimates were very reliable (pairwise CCC: 0.921, 0.928 and 0.916). They showed a reasonable agreement with visual MD assessment (weighted kappa ranging 0.79-0.81). DM-Scan and Cumulus measures were highly concordant (CCC ranging 0.80-0.84), but ours tended to be higher (4%-5% on average). As expected, DM-Scan estimates varied with age, BMI, parity and family history of BC. Finally, DM-Scan measures were significantly associated with BC (p-trend=0.005). Taking MD<7% as reference, OR per categories of MD were: OR7%-17%=1.32 (95% CI=0.59-2.99), OR17%-28%=2.28 (95% CI=1.03-5.04) and OR>=29%=3.10 (95% CI=1.35-7.14). Our results confirm that DM-Scan is a reliable tool to assess MD in full-field digital mammograms.