Comparison between software volumetric breast density estimates in breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography images in a large public screening cohort

被引:7
|
作者
Fornvik, Daniel [1 ]
Fornvik, Hannie [1 ]
Fieselmann, Andreas [2 ]
Lang, Kristina [1 ]
Sartor, Hanna [1 ]
机构
[1] Lund Univ, Dept Translat Med, Skane Univ Hosp, Dept Med Imaging & Physiol,Med Radiol Unit, Inga Marie Nilssons Gata 49, S-20502 Malmo, Sweden
[2] Siemens Healthcare GmbH, Forchheim, Germany
关键词
Mammography; Digital breast tomosynthesis; Diagnostic imaging; Mass screening; Breast neoplasms; CANCER RISK; AGREEMENT; OBSERVER;
D O I
10.1007/s00330-018-5582-0
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
ObjectivesTo compare software estimates of volumetric breast density (VBD) based on breast tomosynthesis (BT) projections to those based on digital mammography (DM) images in a large screening cohort, the Malmo Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial (MBTST).MethodsDM and BT images of 9909 women (enrolled 2010-2015) were retrospectively analysed with prototype software to estimate VBD. Software calculation is based on a physics model of the image acquisition process and incorporates the effect of masking in DM based on accumulated dense tissue areas. VBD (continuously and categorically) was compared between BT [central projection (mediolateral oblique view (MLO)] and two-view DM, and with radiologists' BI-RADS density 4(th) ed. scores. Agreement and correlation were investigated with weighted kappa (), Spearman's correlation coefficient (r), and Bland-Altman analysis.ResultsThere was a high correlation (r = 0.83) between VBD in DM and BT and substantial agreement between the software breast density categories [observed agreement, 61.3% and 84.8%; = 0.61 and ? = 0.69 for four (a/b/c/d) and two (fat involuted vs. dense) density categories, respectively]. There was moderate agreement between radiologists' BI-RADS scores and software density categories in DM (? = 0.55) and BT (? = 0.47).ConclusionsIn a large public screening setting, we report a substantial agreement between VBD in DM and BT using software with special focus on masking effect. This automated and objective mode of measuring VBD may be of value to radiologists and women when BT is used as the primary breast cancer screening modality.Key Points center dot There was a high correlation between continuous volumetric breast density in DM and BT.center dot There was substantial agreement between software breast density categories (four groups) in DM and BT; with clinically warranted binary software breast density categories, the agreement increased markedly.center dot There was moderate agreement between radiologists' BI-RADS scores and software breast density categories in DM and BT.
引用
收藏
页码:330 / 336
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Comparison between software volumetric breast density estimates in breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography images in a large public screening cohort
    Daniel Förnvik
    Hannie Förnvik
    Andreas Fieselmann
    Kristina Lång
    Hanna Sartor
    [J]. European Radiology, 2019, 29 : 330 - 336
  • [2] Volumetric Breast Density: Comparison of Estimates From Tomosynthesis Reconstructions with Mammography
    Shi, L.
    Vedantham, S.
    Michaelsen, K.
    Krishnaswamy, V.
    Shenoy, A.
    Pogue, B.
    Karellas, A.
    Paulsen, K.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2014, 41 (06)
  • [3] COMPARISON BETWEEN DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY AND DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS IN THE DIAGNOSIS OF BREAST CANCER
    Jari, Irina
    Naum, A. G.
    Gheorghe, Liliana
    Negru, D.
    Ursaru, Manuela
    [J]. MEDICAL-SURGICAL JOURNAL-REVISTA MEDICO-CHIRURGICALA, 2019, 123 (01): : 102 - 108
  • [4] Fully Automated Quantitative Estimation of Volumetric Breast Density from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images: Preliminary Results and Comparison with Digital Mammography and MR Imaging
    Pertuz, Said
    McDonald, Elizabeth S.
    Weinstein, Susan P.
    Conant, Emily F.
    Kontos, Despina
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2016, 279 (01) : 65 - 74
  • [5] BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS OR DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY FOR BREAST CANCER SCREENING?
    Svahn, Tony
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS IN THE BALTIC STATES, 2011, : 53 - 56
  • [6] Comparison of Tomosynthesis Plus Digital Mammography and Digital Mammography Alone for Breast Cancer Screening
    Haas, Brian M.
    Kalra, Vivek
    Geisel, Jaime
    Raghu, Madhavi
    Durand, Melissa
    Philpotts, Liane E.
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2013, 269 (03) : 694 - 700
  • [7] Breast Cancer Screening With Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammography
    Seidenwurm, David
    Rosenberg, Robert
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2014, 312 (16): : 1695 - 1695
  • [8] Screening Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Controversies
    Funaro, Kimberly
    Drukteinis, Jennifer
    Falcon, Shannon
    [J]. SOUTHERN MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2017, 110 (10) : 607 - 613
  • [9] Volumetric breast density affects performance of digital screening mammography
    Wanders, Johanna O. P.
    Holland, Katharina
    Veldhuis, Wouter B.
    Mann, Ritse M.
    Pijnappel, Ruud M.
    Peeters, Petra H. M.
    van Gils, Carla H.
    Karssemeijer, Nico
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2017, 162 (01) : 95 - 103
  • [10] Volumetric breast density affects performance of digital screening mammography
    Johanna O. P. Wanders
    Katharina Holland
    Wouter B. Veldhuis
    Ritse M. Mann
    Ruud M. Pijnappel
    Petra H. M. Peeters
    Carla H. van Gils
    Nico Karssemeijer
    [J]. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2017, 162 : 95 - 103