Mammographic density measurement: a comparison of automated volumetric density measurement to BIRADS

McEntee, Mark F.; Damases, Christine N.

doi:10.1117/12.2042966

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although there was a moderate agreement between RANZCR and VDG in assessment of 40 cases, this study demonstrates that VDG generally provides a higher MD result than that of the RANZCR synoptic scale (Table ). This finding is consistent with our previous work assessing agreement between BIRADS and Volpara . Wide ranges of AvBD% for each RANZCR category were demonstrated, suggesting that a single RANZCR category is likely to contain AvBD percentages that extend beyond the thresholds assigned by Volpara (Fig ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Furthermore, there is no legislation in Australia requiring radiologists to include MD in their radiological report. Thus, it is perhaps unsurprising to find less consistency in MD reporting in Australia compared to previously reported papers in the United States . Further work is also necessary to determine whether radiologists themselves were consistent when grading density of the same sets of mammograms on different occasions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Inter‐observer variability in mammographic density assessment using Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) synoptic scales

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Inter‐observer variability in mammographic density assessment using Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) synoptic scales

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Technologists at some sites document a minimum of a 3, 6, 9, and 12 o'clock image, while at others sites record one image if the provider deems the breast is normal. Furthermore, radiologists subjectively determine the degree of breast density when reading screening mammograms and inter and intra‐observer reliability is low . This can be confusing when a patient may be told she has dense breasts 1 year but not the following year.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Connecticut Experiment; The Third Installment: 4 Years of Screening Women with Dense Breasts with Bilateral Ultrasound

Weigert

2016

Breast J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To determine if the addition of breast ultrasound in women with dense breasts finds cancers that otherwise would have been obscured. Retrospective chart review from five sites from October 2009 through December 2013. Data included: number of screening mammograms; number of screening ultrasounds; Breast Imaging Reporting Data System code results; biopsy results including type of lesion, size, nuclear grade, receptor and node status, and patient demographic data. Year 1, 2,706 ultrasound with 151 biopsies yielded 11 cancers, positive predictive value (PPV) 7.3%. Detection rate of 4.0/1,000. Year 2, 3,351 ultrasounds with 180 biopsies yielded 11 cancers and high risk lesions (HRL), PPV 6.1%. Detection rate 3.3/1,000. Year 3, 4,128 ultrasounds with 148 biopsies yielded 13 cancers and HRL, PPV 8.8%. Detection rate 3.1/1,000. Year 4, 3,331 ultrasounds with 53 biopsies yielded 11 cancers and HRL, PPV of 20.1%. Detection rate of 3.3/1,000. Lesion size ranged 0.3-8.0 cm. Patient age 45-77 years. Three tumors nuclear grade 3 and 1 nuclear grade 2 had positive sentinel nodes. 8 patents had risk factors other than dense breasts. Cancers in patients with prior negative screening ultrasound measured 0.4-1.2 cm and were node negative. Breast ultrasound in women with dense breasts detects mammographically occult malignancy. Over 4 years, the PPV doubled indicating increased accuracy of lesions biopsied while rate of detection remained stable. Lesions were of all cancer types, grade and hormonal status. Only high grade cancers were sentinel node positive and women returning for yearly ultrasound had small lesions with no positive sentinel nodes.

show abstract

“…Its volume percent density measure has recently been demonstrated to correlate well with density measured from MRI images (4,6,7), the Breast Imaging-Reporting And Data System (BIRADS; refs. 7,8), and a semiautomated area-based approach, Cumulus (9). Volpara requires raw mammograms.…”

Section: Volumetric Mammographic Density Measurementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There is, however, still a scarcity of large-scale research studies assessing mammographic density from FFDM images in conjunction with breast cancer risk, although prior studies (4,(6)(7)(8)(9), have demonstrated that Volpara can be an effective volumetric measurement method.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pectoral Muscle Attenuation as a Marker for Breast Cancer Risk in Full-Field Digital Mammography

Cheddad

Czene

Hall

et al. 2015

Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &Amp; Prevention

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Mammographic percent density is an established marker of breast cancer risk. In a study of screen film mammograms, we recently reported a novel feature from the pectoral muscle region to be associated with breast cancer risk independently of area percent density (APD). We now investigate whether our novel feature is associated with risk in a study based on fullfield digital mammography (FFDM).Methods: We carried out a breast cancer risk analysis using a data set of 3,552 healthy controls and 278 cases. We included three image-based measures in our analyses: volumetric percent density (VPD), APD, and the mean intensity of the pectoral muscle (MIP). The datasets comprised different machine vendors and models. In addition, the controls dataset was used to test for the association of our measures against rs10995190, in the ZNF365 gene, a genetic variant known to

show abstract

Mammographic density measurement: a comparison of automated volumetric density measurement to BIRADS

Cited by 6 publications

References 12 publications

Inter‐observer variability in mammographic density assessment using Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) synoptic scales

Inter‐observer variability in mammographic density assessment using Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) synoptic scales

The Connecticut Experiment; The Third Installment: 4 Years of Screening Women with Dense Breasts with Bilateral Ultrasound

Pectoral Muscle Attenuation as a Marker for Breast Cancer Risk in Full-Field Digital Mammography

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About