Research News: Breast Cancer Rates Unaffected by Family History

Moderators

RSNA: Breast Cancer Rates Unaffected by Family History
November 30, 2011
For women age 40 to 49, a study found no link between family history and the risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer. Read more...

Mutd

Very interesting! The original abstract is here:

http://m.rsna.org/rsna2011/program/event_display.cfm?em_id=11007984 

but it doesn't say much about overall risk of Dx with bc? What they say is that _if_ you are diagnosed, _then_ the risk of the breast cancer being invasive does not depend on FH. Also the risk of having pos nodes doesn't depend on FH. But 39% of the patients had family history which, if I get it right, means that the women with FH were disproportionately more likely to be Dx'd in their 40ies? Also they write that the women with FH had significantly higher number of mammos with masses.

 It must be very important for the women in lower-risk (no-FH) group, because the cancers discovered by their mammos are just as dangerous as the cancers in the higher-risk group. But (if I get it right) this RSNA report is no condolense for the High Risk women. As few as they are in numbers, almost 40% of all cancers were theirs...

faithhopenluv

Family history is one high risk factor - I am finding so little information on the impact of the other risk factors (I have all) - early periods, no kids at 41, was on the pill and so they say dense breasts.  They are the only ones I've ever felt so I take the Drs words for it).  There are many percentages and studies that quantify the increase of risk with a family members diagnosis, but I don't see the same with the other risk factors.  I wonder if that is most significant for the 40-49 diagnosis. 

Cherilynn64

I'm wondering too. I felt my tumor just after turning 46 and didn't do anything about it till 6 weeks ago and I'm 47 1/2 (ie I let it go 1.5 yrs due to no family history). I never had children and was on the pill but only a few years out of college then from 2010-11. That's it. No early periods, no family history or any kind of cancer on either side of the famly, hell I've barely had a cold or flu in the last 20 years....then bam, get hit with this. I do have extremely dense breasts and that's what hid it on the mammogram that I didn't start getting till 45 since I have no family history. So yes, I'm wondering if 40-49 is perhaps a "magic" age range that gets hit the hardest if other factors play in to it but zero family history.