Back to Authors

Miglioretti, Diana L.

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5547-1833

Mayo Clinic

University of California, Davis

Citations 13

Breast Density and Benign Breast Disease: Risk Assessment to Identify Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer
Tice, Jeffrey A. , Miglioretti, Diana L. , Li, Chin-Shang, Vachon, Celine M. , Gard, Charlotte C. , Vachon, Celine M. , Kerlikowske, Karla , Miglioretti, Diana L

Journal of Clinical Oncology | August 17, 2015 | Volume: 33 | Issue: 28 | Pages: 3137-3143

10.1200/jco.2015.60.8869 Get It

Purpose Women with proliferative breast lesions are candidates for primary prevention, but few risk models incorporate benign findings to assess breast cancer risk. We incorporated benign breast disease (BBD) diagnoses into the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) risk model, the only breast cancer risk assessment tool that uses breast density. Methods We developed and validated a competing-risk model using 2000 to 2010 SEER data for breast cancer incidence and 2010 vital statistics to adjust for the competing risk of death. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to estimate the relative hazards for age, race/ethnicity, family history of breast cancer, history of breast biopsy, BBD diagnoses, and breast density in the BCSC. Results We included 1,135,977 women age 35 to 74 years undergoing mammography with no history of breast cancer; 17% of the women had a prior breast biopsy. During a mean follow-up of 6.9 years, 17,908 women were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer. The BCSC BBD model slightly overpredicted risk (expected-to-observed ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.06) and had modest discriminatory accuracy (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve, 0.665). Among women with proliferative findings, adding BBD to the model increased the proportion of women with an estimated 5-year risk of 3% or higher from 9.3% to 27.8% (P < .001). Conclusion The BCSC BBD model accurately estimates women's risk for breast cancer using breast density and BBD diagnoses. Greater numbers of high-risk women eligible for primary prevention after BBD diagnosis are identified using the BCSC BBD model.
Breast Cancer Risk by Breast Density, Menopause, and Postmenopausal Hormone Therapy Use
Cummings, Steve, Vachon, Celine M. , Vacek, Pamela M. , Miglioretti, Diana L. , Kerlikowske, Karla , Cook, Andrea J. , Buist, Diana S.M. , Vachon, Celine M. , Miglioretti, Diana L

Journal of Clinical Oncology | July 20, 2010 | Volume: 28 | Issue: 24 | Pages: 3830-3837

10.1200/jco.2009.26.4770 Get It

Purpose We determined whether the association between breast density and breast cancer risk and cancer severity differs according to menopausal status and postmenopausal hormone therapy (HT) use. Methods We collected data on 587,369 women who underwent 1,349,027 screening mammography examinations; 14,090 women were diagnosed with breast cancer. We calculated 5-year breast cancer risk from a survival model for subgroups of women classified by their Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) breast density, age, menopausal status, and current HT use, assuming a body mass index of 25 kg/m 2 . Odds of advanced (ie, IIb, III, IV) versus early (ie, I, IIa) stage invasive cancer was calculated according to BIRADS density. Results Breast cancer risk was low among women with low density (BIRADS-1): women age 55 to 59 years, 5-year risk was 0.8% (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9%) for non-HT users and 0.9% (95% CI, 0.7% to 1.1%) for estrogen and estrogen plus progestin users. Breast cancer risk was high among women with very high density (BIRADS-4), particularly estrogen plus progestin users: women age 55 to 59 years, 5-year risk was 2.4% (95% CI, 2.0% to 2.8%) for non-HT users, 3.0% (95% CI, 2.6% to 3.5%) for estrogen users, and 4.2% (95% CI, 3.7% to 4.6%) for estrogen plus progestin users. Advanced-stage breast cancer risk was increased 1.7-fold for postmenopausal HT users who had very high density (BIRADS-4) compared to those with average density (BIRADS-2). Conclusion Postmenopausal women with high breast density are at increased risk of breast cancer and should be aware of the added risk of taking HT, especially estrogen plus progestin.
Genetic Counseling Outcomes: Perceived Risk and Distress After Counseling for Hereditary Colorectal Cancer
Codori, Ann‐Marie, Waldeck, Tracy, Petersen, Gloria M. , Miglioretti, Diana L. , Trimbath, Jill D., Tillery, Miriam, Miglioretti, Diana L

Journal of Genetic Counseling | June 13, 2005 | Volume: 14 | Issue: 2 | Pages: 119-132

10.1007/s10897-005-4062-2 Get It

AbstractGenetic counseling may turn risk information into cancer prevention behavior by modifying health beliefs and cancer‐related distress. We assessed the effect of genetic counseling on these factors in 101 adult first‐degree‐relatives of colorectal cancer patients from families with known or suspected hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer. Before counseling and once afterward, subjects completed self‐report measures of perceived lifetime risk and cancer‐distress. Most persons overestimated their cancer risk, and higher perceived risk was associated with believing that colorectal cancer cannot be prevented. Individual perceived risk changed after counseling, although mean perceived risk was unchanged. After adjusting for baseline risk, older persons and those with higher estimated objective cancer risk had larger postcounseling decreases. Distress after counseling was positively correlated with baseline distress and anxiety symptoms, and inversely correlated with tolerance for ambiguity. The findings suggest counseling interventions that should increase the likelihood of screening and offer hypotheses for future research.