Methodological Challenges and Updated Findings from a Meta-analysis of the Association between Mammographic Density and Breast Cancer
Open Access
- 1 January 2019
- journal article
- review article
- Published by American Association for Cancer Research (AACR) in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
- Vol. 28 (1) , 22-31
Abstract
Mammographic density (MD) is an established predictor of breast cancer risk. However, there is limited information on the robustness of the risk associations for different study designs and the associated methodologic challenges. Our analysis includes 165 samples from studies published since 2006. We use a weakly informative Bayesian approach to avoid unduly optimistic estimates of uncertainty, as found in the previous literature. We find that the existing consensus from previous review studies has underestimated the strength and precision of MD as a risk marker. Moreover, although much of the published literature is based on categorical measurement of MD, there are tangible advantages in using continuous data in terms of estimate precision and relevance for different patient populations. Estimates based on the percentage of MD are more precise for lower density women, whereas absolute MD has advantages for higher density. We show that older results might not be a good proxy for current and future findings, and it would be pertinent to adjust clinical interpretations based on the older data. Using an appropriate estimation method cognizant of the importance of heterogeneity is critical to obtaining reliable and robust clinical findings that are relevant for broad patient populations.Keywords
Funding Information
- Cancer Council Western Australia (APP1085750)
- National Breast Cancer Foundation (ECF-17-010)
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Mammographic Breast Density: Impact on Breast Cancer Risk and Implications for ScreeningRadioGraphics, 2015
- Mammographic Density Phenotypes and Risk of Breast Cancer: A Meta-analysisJNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2014
- A Nondegenerate Penalized Likelihood Estimator for Variance Parameters in Multilevel ModelsPsychometrika, 2013
- Avoiding zero between‐study variance estimates in random‐effects meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2013
- Is mammographic density differentially associated with breast cancer according to receptor status? A meta-analysisBreast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2012
- Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: current understanding and future prospectsBreast Cancer Research, 2011
- A Re-Evaluation of Random-Effects Meta-AnalysisJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 2008
- Breast Density and Parenchymal Patterns as Markers of Breast Cancer Risk: A Meta-analysisCancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, 2006
- Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2002
- Inference from Iterative Simulation Using Multiple SequencesStatistical Science, 1992