Diet across the Lifespan and the Association with Breast Density in Adulthood

Table 5

Studies of dietary fat intake in adulthood and breast density.

Author, year	Study population,; 𝑛	Design	Age	Foods/Nutrients of interest	Dietary assessment	Outcome	Major significant results	Adjustments
Brisson et al. 1989 [30]; (Also in Table 7)	CNBSS—newly Diagnosed BC patients; cases: 𝑛=290  controls: 𝑛= 645; total 𝑛=935 (Canada)	CC	40–62 y	Dietary fats	114-item FFQ + questions on vitamin A	Wolfe classification (high risk: P2 + DY; low risk: N1 + P1); (mammogram: visual estimation)	Controls (total densities): saturated fat𝑄4versus𝑄1: 44.2% versus 38.6%, β = 0.370; (SE = 0.141)	Age, body weight, parity, education, energy
Masala et al. 2006 [24]; (also in Tables 3, 5, and 7)	Mediterranean population—florence section of EPIC; 𝑛=1,668; (Italy)	CS	Pre-, post-, and perimenopausal women	Dietary fats	160-item FFQ	Wolfe classification (P2 + DY versus N1 + P1) & semiquantitative method	All women: P2 + DY versus N1 + P1: Olive Oil OR𝑇3versus𝑇1 0.73 (95% CI: 0.55–0.98) linolenic acid OR𝑇3versus𝑇1 = 0.69 (95% CI: 0.47–0.99, P trend = 0.05)	Age, education, BMI, menopausal status, total energy (log), each food separately (tertiles)
Nagata et al. 2005 [31]; (also in Table 7)	Japanese women; 𝑛=601  (Japan)	CS	Premenopausal women: 42.6 y; Postmenopausal women: 57.8 y	Dietary fats	169-item FFQ	PBD (Mammogram: fully-automated method)	Postmenopausal women: Total Fat: Q4 versus Q1 = 15.5 (95% CI: 10.8–21.2) versus 9.9% (95% CI: 6.8–13.7; Saturated fat: Q4 versus Q1 = 16.5% (95 CI:11.3–22.6%) versus 7.3% (95% CI: 4.7–10.4%)	Age, BMI, smoking status, number of births, hx of breast feeding for premenopausal women and for age, BMI, education, age at menopause for postmenopausal women. Nutrient intakes were adjusted for total energy.
Nordevang et al. 1993 [25]; (also in Tables 3 and 7)	BC Patients (stage I-II); 𝑛=238  (Sweden)	CS	57.5 y	Dietary fats	Dietary history interview within 4 months of BC diagnosis	Wolfe classification (N1 + P1 versus P2 + Dy)	Premenopausal women: P2 + Dy versus N1 + P1: total fat; (42.04 versus 34.72% E); saturated fat (19.27 versus 15.42% E), MUFA (14.22 versus 11.98% E); PUFA (5.65 versus 4.70), n-6 FA (4.69 versus 3.81% E); postmenopausal women: P2 + Dy versus N1 + P1: MUFA (12.88 versus 12.32% E)	BMI, age, ER status
Sala et al. 2000 [29]; (also in Tables 4 and 7)	EPIC-Norfolk; Cases: P2/DY; Controls: N1/P1 (𝑛=203 cases and 𝑛=203 controls)  (UK)	NCC	Cases and controls: 59 y	Dietary fats	7-day food record	Wolfe patterns: (high risk: P2 & DY; low risk: N1 & P1)	Null	Menopausal status, parity, HRT, BMI
Tseng et al. 2007 [27]; (also in Table 3, 4, and 7)	1st degree or 2nd degree relative with BC or ovarian cancer 𝑛=157; (US, NH-White)	CS	50 y	Dietary fats	126 item validated FFQ	PBD: BIRADS	Null	Age, BMI, caloric intake, age at menarche, menopausal status, history of HRT, family history category.
Qureshi et al. 2011 [32] (also in Table 7)	NBCSP; 𝑛=2,252; Postmenopausal women; (Norway)	CS	58 y	Dietary fats	180-item validated FFQ	PBD & AD (mammogram: computer-assisted method)	PBD: Saturated fat𝑄4versus𝑄1: 19.7 (95% CI: 18.7–20.7%) versus 17.0 (95% CI: 15.6–18.3, P-trend = 0.06)	Age at mammography, y of education, age at menarche, number of pregnancies, age at first full-term pregnancy for parous women, HRT, BMI, total energy
Vachon et al. 2000 [9]; (also in Tables 3, 4, and 7)	MBCFCS; 𝑛=1508  (US, NH-White)	CS	61.4 y	Dietary fats	153-item FFQ	PBD (mammogram: visual estimation)	Premenopausal women: PUFAs: Q4 versus Q1: 42% (95% CI: 35–49%) versus 38% (95% CI: 37–51%) PUFA : SFA: 43% (95% CI: 36–50%) versus 38% (33–44%,); SFA: Q4 versus Q1: 37% (95% CI: 32–43%) versus 44% (95% CI: 37–51%)	Energy, age, BMI, WHR, PA, age at menarche, age at first birth and number of births (combined), self-reported alcohol intake, smoking, family hx of BC, HRT (all and postmenopausal women), OC (premenopausal women)