Volumetric breast density affects performance of digital screening mammography

被引:113
|
作者
Wanders, Johanna O. P. [1 ]
Holland, Katharina [2 ]
Veldhuis, Wouter B. [3 ]
Mann, Ritse M. [2 ]
Pijnappel, Ruud M. [3 ,4 ]
Peeters, Petra H. M. [1 ,5 ]
van Gils, Carla H. [1 ]
Karssemeijer, Nico [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, POB 85500, NL-3508 GA Utrecht, Netherlands
[2] Radboud Univ Nijmegen, Dept Radiol & Nucl Med, Med Ctr, Geert Grootepl 10, NL-6525 GA Nijmegen, Netherlands
[3] Univ Med Ctr Utrecht, Dept Radiol, POB 85500, NL-3508 GA Utrecht, Netherlands
[4] Dutch Reference Ctr Screening, Postbus 6873, NL-6503 GJ Nijmegen, Netherlands
[5] Imperial Coll London, Dept Epidemiol & Biostat, MRC PHE Ctr Environm & Hlth, Sch Publ Hlth, St Marys Campus,Norfolk Pl, London W2 1PG, England
关键词
Mammographic density; Breast cancer; Cancer screening; Mammography; Breast; FILM MAMMOGRAPHY; CANCER RISK; VISUAL ASSESSMENT; UNITED-STATES; CATEGORIES; COHORT; WOMEN;
D O I
10.1007/s10549-016-4090-7
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
To determine to what extent automatically measured volumetric mammographic density influences screening performance when using digital mammography (DM). We collected a consecutive series of 111,898 DM examinations (2003-2011) from one screening unit of the Dutch biennial screening program (age 50-75 years). Volumetric mammographic density was automatically assessed using Volpara. We determined screening performance measures for four density categories comparable to the American College of Radiology (ACR) breast density categories. Of all the examinations, 21.6% were categorized as density category 1 ('almost entirely fatty') and 41.5, 28.9, and 8.0% as category 2-4 ('extremely dense'), respectively. We identified 667 screen-detected and 234 interval cancers. Interval cancer rates were 0.7, 1.9, 2.9, and 4.4aEuro degrees and false positive rates were 11.2, 15.1, 18.2, and 23.8aEuro degrees for categories 1-4, respectively (both p-trend < 0.001). The screening sensitivity, calculated as the proportion of screen-detected among the total of screen-detected and interval tumors, was lower in higher density categories: 85.7, 77.6, 69.5, and 61.0% for categories 1-4, respectively (p-trend < 0.001). Volumetric mammographic density, automatically measured on digital mammograms, impacts screening performance measures along the same patterns as established with ACR breast density categories. Since measuring breast density fully automatically has much higher reproducibility than visual assessment, this automatic method could help with implementing density-based supplemental screening.
引用
收藏
页码:95 / 103
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] 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
  • [2] Screening Performance of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis vs Digital Mammography in Community Practice by Patient Age, Screening Round, and Breast Density
    Lowry, Kathryn P.
    Coley, Rebecca Yates
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    Henderson, Louise M.
    Onega, Tracy
    Sprague, Brian L.
    Lee, Janie M.
    Herschorn, Sally
    Tosteson, Anna N. A.
    Rauscher, Garth
    Lee, Christoph, I
    [J]. JAMA NETWORK OPEN, 2020, 3 (07)
  • [3] Quantification of masking risk in screening mammography with volumetric breast density maps
    Katharina Holland
    Carla H. van Gils
    Ritse M. Mann
    Nico Karssemeijer
    [J]. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2017, 162 : 541 - 548
  • [4] Quantification of masking risk in screening mammography with volumetric breast density maps
    Holland, Katharina
    van Gils, Carla H.
    Mann, Ritse M.
    Karssemeijer, Nico
    [J]. BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2017, 162 (03) : 541 - 548
  • [5] The relationship between anatomic noise and volumetric breast density for digital mammography
    Mainprize, James G.
    Tyson, Albert H.
    Yaffe, Martin J.
    [J]. MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2012, 39 (08) : 4660 - 4668
  • [6] Breast Cancer Screening with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Improves Performance of Mammography Screening
    Bae, Min Sun
    Seo, Bo Kyoung
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2023, 307 (03)
  • [7] DIAGNOSTIC PERFORMANCE OF DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY BREAST CANCER SCREENING
    Marquez Cruz, M. D.
    Marquez Calderon, S.
    [J]. GACETA SANITARIA, 2009, 23 : 199 - 200
  • [8] Digital mammography screening: sensitivity of the programme dependent on breast density
    Stefanie Weigel
    W. Heindel
    J. Heidrich
    H.-W. Hense
    O. Heidinger
    [J]. European Radiology, 2017, 27 : 2744 - 2751
  • [9] Digital mammography screening: sensitivity of the programme dependent on breast density
    Weigel, Stefanie
    Heindel, W.
    Heidrich, J.
    Hense, H. -W.
    Heidinger, O.
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2017, 27 (07) : 2744 - 2751
  • [10] Comparison between software volumetric breast density estimates in breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography images in a large public screening cohort
    Fornvik, Daniel
    Fornvik, Hannie
    Fieselmann, Andreas
    Lang, Kristina
    Sartor, Hanna
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2019, 29 (01) : 330 - 336