BackgroundBreast cancer risk factors have been examined extensively in Western setting and more developed Asian cities/countries. However, there are limited data on developing Asian countries. The purpose of this study was to examine breast cancer risk factors and the change of selected risk factors across birth cohorts in Malaysian women.MethodsAn unmatched hospital based case-control study was conducted from October 2002 to December 2016 in Selangor, Malaysia. A total of 3,683 cases and 3,980 controls were included in this study. Unconditional logistic regressions, adjusted for potential confounding factors, were conducted. The breast cancer risk factors were compared across four birth cohorts by ethnicity.ResultsEver breastfed, longer breastfeeding duration, a higher soymilk and soy product intake, and a higher level of physical activity were associated with lower risk of breast cancer. Chinese had the lowest breastfeeding rate, shortest breastfeeding duration, lowest parity and highest age of first full term pregnancy.ConclusionsOur study shows that breastfeeding, soy intake and physical activity are modifiable risk factors for breast cancer. With the increasing incidence of breast cancer there is an urgent need to educate the women about lifestyle intervention they can take to reduce their breast cancer risk.

Purpose Late stage at presentation and poor adherence to treatment remain major contributors to poor survival in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Patient navigation (PN) programs in the United States have led to improvement in diagnostic or treatment timeliness, particularly for women in lower socioeconomic classes or minority groups. To date, studies of PN in Asia have been limited. We aimed to assess the feasibility of PN in a state-run hospital in an LMIC and to report the impact on diagnostic and treatment timeliness for patients in its first year of implementation. Methods We established PN in a dedicated breast clinic of a Malaysian state-run hospital. We compared diagnostic and treatment timeliness between navigated patients (n = 135) and patients diagnosed in the prior year (n = 148), and described factors associated with timeliness. Results Women with PN received timely mammography compared with patients in the prior year (96.4% v 74.4%; P < .001), biopsy (92.5% v 76.1%; P = .003), and communication of news (80.0% v 58.5%; P < .001). PN reduced treatment default rates (4.4% v 11.5%; P = .048). Among navigated patients, late stage at presentation was independently associated with having emotional and language barriers ( P = .01). Finally, the main reason reported for delay, default, or refusal of treatment was the preference for alternative therapy. Conclusion PN is feasible for addressing barriers to cancer care when integrated with a state-run breast clinic of an LMIC. Its implementation resulted in improved diagnostic timeliness and reduced treatment default. Wider adoption of PN could be a key element of cancer control in LMICs.

Our analysis suggests that among post-menopausal women, population differences in mammographic density and risk to breast cancer may be accounted for by height, weight, and parity. Given that pre-menopausal Asian and Caucasian women have similar population risk to breast cancer but different dense volume, development of more appropriate biomarkers of risk in pre-menopausal women is required.

Mammographic density (MD) is a quantitative trait, measurable in all women, and is among the strongest markers of breast cancer risk. The population-based epidemiology of MD has revealed genetic, lifestyle and societal/environmental determinants, but studies have largely been conducted in women with similar westernized lifestyles living in countries with high breast cancer incidence rates. To benefit from the heterogeneity in risk factors and their combinations worldwide, we created an International Consortium on Mammographic Density (ICMD) to pool individual-level epidemiological and MD data from general population studies worldwide. ICMD aims to characterize determinants of MD more precisely, and to evaluate whether they are consistent across populations worldwide. We included 11755 women, from 27 studies in 22 countries, on whom individual-level risk factor data were pooled and original mammographic images were re-read for ICMD by a core team to obtain standardized comparable MD data. In the present article, we present (i) the rationale for this consortium; (ii) characteristics of the studies and women included; and (iii) study methodology to obtain comparable MD data from original re-read films. We also highlight the risk factor heterogeneity captured by such an effort and, thus, the unique insight the pooled study promises to offer through wider exposure ranges, different confounding structures and enhanced power for sub-group analyses.

Objectives Patient‐reported outcomes (PROs) in high‐income countries (HICs) suggest that physical, emotional, and psychological needs are important in cancer care. To date, there have been few inconsistent descriptions of PROs in low‐income and middle‐income Asian countries. Using a standard questionnaire developed by the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM), we compared the perceived importance of PROs between patients in Malaysia and those in HICs and between clusters of Malaysian women. Methods Breast cancer patients were recruited from three Malaysian hospitals between June and November 2017. We compared the proportion of patients who rated PROs as very important (scored 7‐9 on a 9‐point Likert scale) between Malaysian patients and data collected from patients in HICs via the ICHOM questionnaire development process, using logistic regression. A two‐step cluster analysis explored differences in PROs among Malaysian patients. Results The most important PROs for both cohorts were survival, overall well‐being, and physical functioning. Compared with HIC patients (n = 1177), Malaysian patients (n = 969) were less likely to rate emotional (78% vs 90%), cognitive (76% vs 84%), social (72% vs 81%), and sexual (30% vs 56%) functioning as very important outcomes (P < 0.001). Cluster analysis suggests that older, parous, Malaysian women, who were less likely to have received breast reconstructive surgery, were more likely to rate body image and satisfaction with the breast as very important outcomes. Conclusion Taking into account the differences in PROs by cultural and socioeconomic settings could improve patient expectation of services and refine the assessment of cancer care outcomes.

Our findings suggest that the beneficial effects of physical activity on breast cancer risk may not be measurable through mammographic density. Future research is needed to identify appropriate biomarkers to assess the effect of physical activity on breast cancer risk.

BackgroundThe incidence of breast cancer in Asia is increasing because of urbanization and lifestyle changes. In the developing countries in Asia, women present at late stages, and mortality is high. Mammographic screening is the only evidence-based screening modality that reduces breast cancer mortality. To date, only opportunistic screening is offered in the majority of Asian countries because of the lack of justification and funding. Nevertheless, there have been few reports on the effectiveness of such programmes. In this study, we describe the cancer detection rate and challenges experienced in an opportunistic mammographic screening programme in Malaysia.MethodsFrom October 2011 to June 2015, 1,778 asymptomatic women, aged 40–74 years, underwent subsidised mammographic screening. All patients had a clinical breast examination before mammographic screening, and women with mammographic abnormalities were referred to a surgeon. The cancer detection rate and variables associated with a recommendation for adjunct ultrasonography were determined.ResultsThe mean age for screening was 50.8 years and seven cancers (0.39%) were detected. The detection rate was 0.64% in women aged 50 years and above, and 0.12% in women below 50 years old. Adjunct ultrasonography was recommended in 30.7% of women, and was significantly associated with age, menopausal status, mammographic density and radiologist’s experience. The main reasons cited for recommendation of an adjunct ultrasound was dense breasts and mammographic abnormalities.DiscussionThe cancer detection rate is similar to population-based screening mammography programmes in high-income Asian countries. Unlike population-based screening programmes in Caucasian populations where the adjunct ultrasonography rate is 2–4%, we report that 3 out of 10 women attending screening mammography were recommended for adjunct ultrasonography. This could be because Asian women attending screening are likely premenopausal and hence have denser breasts. Radiologists who reported more than 360 mammograms were more confident in reporting a mammogram as normal without adjunct ultrasonography compared to those who reported less than 180 mammograms.ConclusionOur subsidised opportunistic mammographic screening programme is able to provide equivalent cancer detection rates but the high recall for adjunct ultrasonography would make screening less cost-effective.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12889-017-4015-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

IntroductionFor women of the same age and body mass index, increased mammographic density is one of the strongest predictors of breast cancer risk. There are multiple methods of measuring mammographic density and other features in a mammogram that could potentially be used in a screening setting to identify and target women at high risk of developing breast cancer. However, it is unclear which measurement method provides the strongest predictor of breast cancer risk.Methods and analysisThe measurement challenge has been established as an international resource to offer a common set of anonymised mammogram images for measurement and analysis. To date, full field digital mammogram images and core data from 1650 cases and 1929 controls from five countries have been collated. The measurement challenge is an ongoing collaboration and we are continuing to expand the resource to include additional image sets across different populations (from contributors) and to compare additional measurement methods (by challengers). The intended use of the measurement challenge resource is for refinement and validation of new and existing mammographic measurement methods. The measurement challenge resource provides a standardised dataset of mammographic images and core data that enables investigators to directly compare methods of measuring mammographic density or other mammographic features in case/control sets of both raw and processed images, for the purposes of the comparing their predictions of breast cancer risk.Ethics and disseminationChallengers and contributors are required to enter a Research Collaboration Agreement with the University of Melbourne prior to participation in the measurement challenge. The Challenge database of collated data and images are stored in a secure data repository at the University of Melbourne. Ethics approval for the measurement challenge is held at University of Melbourne (HREC ID 0931343.3).