Korean Journal of Radiology

The Korean Society of Radiology (대한영상의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Mammographic Density Estimation with Automated Volumetric Breast Density Measurement

  • Ko, Su Yeon (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Eun-Kyung (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Min Jung (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Moon, Hee Jung (Department of Radiology, Severance Hospital, Research Institute of Radiological Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2013.06.04
  • Accepted : 2014.03.01
  • Published : 2014.06.01
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To compare automated volumetric breast density measurement (VBDM) with radiologists' evaluations based on the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS), and to identify the factors associated with technical failure of VBDM. Materials and Methods: In this study, 1129 women aged 19-82 years who underwent mammography from December 2011 to January 2012 were included. Breast density evaluations by radiologists based on BI-RADS and by VBDM (Volpara Version 1.5.1) were compared. The agreement in interpreting breast density between radiologists and VBDM was determined based on four density grades (D1, D2, D3, and D4) and a binary classification of fatty (D1-2) vs. dense (D3-4) breast using kappa statistics. The association between technical failure of VBDM and patient age, total breast volume, fibroglandular tissue volume, history of partial mastectomy, the frequency of mass > 3 cm, and breast density was analyzed. Results: The agreement between breast density evaluations by radiologists and VBDM was fair (k value = 0.26) when the four density grades (D1/D2/D3/D4) were used and moderate (k value = 0.47) for the binary classification (D1-2/D3-4). Twenty-seven women (2.4%) showed failure of VBDM. Small total breast volume, history of partial mastectomy, and high breast density were significantly associated with technical failure of VBDM (p = 0.001 to 0.015). Conclusion: There is fair or moderate agreement in breast density evaluation between radiologists and VBDM. Technical failure of VBDM may be related to small total breast volume, a history of partial mastectomy, and high breast density.

Keywords

References

  1. Ducote JL, Molloi S. Quantification of breast density with dual energy mammography: an experimental feasibility study. Med Phys 2010;37:793-801 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3284975
  2. Balleyguier C, Ayadi S, Van Nguyen K, Vanel D, Dromain C, Sigal R. BIRADS classification in mammography. Eur J Radiol 2007;61:192-194 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.08.033
  3. Yaffe MJ. Mammographic density. Measurement of mammographic density. Breast Cancer Res 2008;10:209 https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2102
  4. Garrido-Estepa M, Ruiz-Perales F, Miranda J, Ascunce N, Gonzalez-Roman I, Sanchez-Contador C, et al. Evaluation of mammographic density patterns: reproducibility and concordance among scales. BMC Cancer 2010;10:485 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-10-485
  5. American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system, Breast imaging atlas, 3rd ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 1993
  6. American College of Radiology. Breast imaging reporting and data system, Breast imaging atlas, 4th ed. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003
  7. Yaffe MJ, Boyd NF, Byng JW, Jong RA, Fishell E, Lockwood GA, et al. Breast cancer risk and measured mammographic density. Eur J Cancer Prev 1998;7 Suppl 1:S47-S55 https://doi.org/10.1097/00008469-199802001-00010
  8. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Yaffe MJ, Minkin S. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: current understanding and future prospects. Breast Cancer Res 2011;13:223 https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2942
  9. Lokate M, Kallenberg MG, Karssemeijer N, Van den Bosch MA, Peeters PH, Van Gils CH. Volumetric breast density from fullfield digital mammograms and its association with breast cancer risk factors: a comparison with a threshold method. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2010;19:3096-3105 https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0703
  10. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, Sun L, Stone J, Fishell E, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007;356:227-236 https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa062790
  11. Lee CI, Bassett LW, Lehman CD. Breast density legislation and opportunities for patient-centered outcomes research. Radiology 2012;264:632-636 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12120184
  12. Hooley RJ, Greenberg KL, Stackhouse RM, Geisel JL, Butler RS, Philpotts LE. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. Radiology 2012;265:59-69 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.12120621
  13. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-174 https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
  14. Martin KE, Helvie MA, Zhou C, Roubidoux MA, Bailey JE, Paramagul C, et al. Mammographic density measured with quantitative computer-aided method: comparison with radiologists' estimates and BI-RADS categories. Radiology 2006;240:656-665 https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2402041947
  15. Ding J, Warren R, Warsi I, Day N, Thompson D, Brady M, et al. Evaluating the effectiveness of using standard mammogram form to predict breast cancer risk: case-control study. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008;17:1074-1081 https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-2634
  16. van Gils CH, Otten JD, Hendriks JH, Holland R, Straatman H, Verbeek AL. High mammographic breast density and its implications for the early detection of breast cancer. J Med Screen 1999;6:200-204 https://doi.org/10.1136/jms.6.4.200
  17. Gierach GL, Ichikawa L, Kerlikowske K, Brinton LA, Farhat GN, Vacek PM, et al. Relationship between mammographic density and breast cancer death in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012;104:1218-1227 https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djs327
  18. Iatrakis G, Zervoudis S, Sparaggis E, Peitsidis P, Economidis P, Malakassis P, et al. Quantitative assessment of breast mammographic density with a new objective method. J Med Life 2011;4:310-313
  19. Stone J, Ding J, Warren RM, Duffy SW. Predicting breast cancer risk using mammographic density measurements from both mammogram sides and views. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2010;124:551-554 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-010-0976-y
  20. Vanel D. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System (BI-RADS): a step towards a universal radiological language? Eur J Radiol 2007;61:183 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.08.030
  21. Jeffreys M, Warren R, Highnam R, Smith GD. Initial experiences of using an automated volumetric measure of breast density: the standard mammogram form. Br J Radiol 2006;79:378-382 https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/24769358
  22. Ciatto S, Houssami N, Apruzzese A, Bassetti E, Brancato B, Carozzi F, et al. Categorizing breast mammographic density: intra- and interobserver reproducibility of BI-RADS density categories. Breast 2005;14:269-275 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2004.12.004
  23. Byng JW, Boyd NF, Fishell E, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ. The quantitative analysis of mammographic densities. Phys Med Biol 1994;39:1629-1638 https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/39/10/008
  24. Heine JJ, Cao K, Rollison DE, Tiffenberg G, Thomas JA. A quantitative description of the percentage of breast density measurement using full-field digital mammography. Acad Radiol 2011;18:556-564 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2010.12.015
  25. McCormack VA, Highnam R, Perry N, dos Santos Silva I. Comparison of a new and existing method of mammographic density measurement: intramethod reliability and associations with known risk factors. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007;16:1148-1154 https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-07-0085
  26. van Engeland S, Snoeren PR, Huisman H, Boetes C, Karssemeijer N. Volumetric breast density estimation from full-field digital mammograms. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2006;25:273-282 https://doi.org/10.1109/TMI.2005.862741
  27. Alonzo-Proulx O, Packard N, Boone JM, Al-Mayah A, Brock KK, Shen SZ, et al. Validation of a method for measuring the volumetric breast density from digital mammograms. Phys Med Biol 2010;55:3027-3044 https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9155/55/11/003
  28. Mawdsley GE, Tyson AH, Peressotti CL, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ. Accurate estimation of compressed breast thickness in mammography. Med Phys 2009;36:577-586 https://doi.org/10.1118/1.3065068
  29. Highnam R, Brady SM, Yaffe MJ, Karssemeijer N, Harvey J. Robust breast composition measurement - VolparaTM. International workshop on digital mammography. Girona: Springer, 2010:342-349
  30. Ko SY, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Moon HJ. Mammographic density estimation: comparison between radiologist's visual assessment and Volpara Breast Density. J Korean Soc Breast Screening 2012;9:11-17

Cited by

  1. Full-field digital mammography image data storage reduction using a crop tool vol.10, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-014-1087-8
  2. Comparing Visually Assessed BI-RADS Breast Density and Automated Volumetric Breast Density Software: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Breast Cancer Screening Setting vol.10, pp.9, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0136667
  3. Comparison of mammographic density estimation by Volpara software with radiologists' visual assessment: analysis of clinical-radiologic factors affecting discrepancy between them vol.56, pp.9, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185114554674
  4. Dietary Patterns for Women With Triple-negative Breast Cancer and Dense Breasts vol.68, pp.8, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1080/01635581.2016.1225102
  5. Mammographic Breast Density Evaluation in Korean Women Using Fully Automated Volumetric Assessment vol.31, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2016.31.3.457
  6. Performance of Screening Mammography: A Report of the Alliance for Breast Cancer Screening in Korea vol.17, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2016.17.4.489
  7. Abbreviated MRI Protocols for Detecting Breast Cancer in Women with Dense Breasts vol.18, pp.3, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2017.18.3.470
  8. Selection and Reporting of Statistical Methods to Assess Reliability of a Diagnostic Test: Conformity to Recommended Methods in a Peer-Reviewed Journal vol.18, pp.6, 2017, https://doi.org/10.3348/kjr.2017.18.6.888
  9. Automated Volumetric Mammographic Breast Density Measurements May Underestimate Percent Breast Density for High-density Breasts vol.24, pp.12, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acra.2017.06.002
  10. Radiation dose affected by mammographic composition and breast size: first application of a radiation dose management system for full-field digital mammography in Korean women vol.15, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-017-1107-6
  11. Mammographic density changes following discontinuation of tamoxifen in premenopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive breast cancer vol.28, pp.8, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-017-5293-y
  12. Comparison of subjective and fully automated methods for measuring mammographic density vol.59, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1177/0284185117712540
  13. Adiposity at Age 10 and Mammographic Density among Premenopausal Women vol.11, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1158/1940-6207.capr-17-0309
  14. Circulating Receptor Activator of Nuclear Factor-κB (RANK), RANK ligand (RANKL), and Mammographic Density in Premenopausal Women vol.11, pp.12, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1158/1940-6207.capr-18-0199
  15. Evaluation of the association between mammographic density and the risk of breast cancer using Quantra software and the BI-RADS classification vol.99, pp.46, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1097/md.0000000000023112
  16. Wavelia Breast Imaging: The Optical Breast Contour Detection Subsystem vol.10, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3390/app10041234
  17. Subjective Versus Quantitative Methods of Assessing Breast Density vol.10, pp.5, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics10050331
  18. Medication use and mammographic breast density vol.189, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-021-06321-5
  19. Coffee, Tea, and Mammographic Breast Density in Premenopausal Women vol.13, pp.11, 2014, https://doi.org/10.3390/nu13113852