Dataset Information

Reproductive Factors and Mammographic Density: Associations Among 24,840 Women and Comparison of Studies Using Digitized Film-Screen Mammography and Full-Field Digital Mammography.

ABSTRACT: Breast density is a modifiable factor that is strongly associated with breast cancer risk. We sought to understand the influence of newer technologies of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) on breast density research and to determine whether results are comparable across studies using FFDM and previous studies using traditional film-screen mammography. We studied 24,840 screening-age (40-74 years) non-Hispanic white women who were participants in the Research Program on Genes, Environment and Health of Kaiser Permanente Northern California and underwent screening mammography with either Hologic (Hologic, Inc., Marlborough, Massachusetts) or General Electric (General Electric Company, Boston, Massachusetts) FFDM machines between 2003 and 2013. We estimated the associations of parity, age at first birth, age at menarche, and menopausal status with percent density and dense area as measured by a single radiological technologist using Cumulus software (Canto Software, Inc., San Francisco, California). We found that associations between reproductive factors and mammographic density measured using processed FFDM images were generally similar in magnitude and direction to those from prior studies using film mammography. Estimated associations for both types of FFDM machines were in the same direction. There was some evidence of heterogeneity in the magnitude of the effect sizes by machine type, which we accounted for using random-effects meta-analysis when combining results. Our findings demonstrate the robustness of quantitative mammographic density measurements across FFDM and film mammography platforms.

SUBMITTER: Alexeeff SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6545283 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reproductive Factors and Mammographic Density: Associations Among 24,840 Women and Comparison of Studies Using Digitized Film-Screen Mammography and Full-Field Digital Mammography.

Alexeeff Stacey E SE Odo Nnaemeka U NU McBride Russell R McGuire Valerie V Achacoso Ninah N Rothstein Joseph H JH Lipson Jafi A JA Liang Rhea Y RY Acton Luana L Yaffe Martin J MJ Whittemore Alice S AS Rubin Daniel L DL Sieh Weiva W Habel Laurel A LA

American journal of epidemiology 20190601 6

Breast density is a modifiable factor that is strongly associated with breast cancer risk. We sought to understand the influence of newer technologies of full-field digital mammography (FFDM) on breast density research and to determine whether results are comparable across studies using FFDM and previous studies using traditional film-screen mammography. We studied 24,840 screening-age (40-74 years) non-Hispanic white women who were participants in the Research Program on Genes, Environment and ...[more]

PMID: 30865217

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo test the hypothesis that American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) categories for breast density reported by radiologists are lower when digital mammography is used than those reported when film-screen (FS) mammography is used.Materials and methodsThis study was institutional review board approved and HIPAA compliant. Demographic data, risk factors, and BI-RADS breast density categories were collected from five mammography registries that were part of the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Active, passive, or waiver of consent was obtained for all participants. Women aged 40 years and older who underwent at least two screening mammographic examinations less than 36 months apart between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2009, were included. Women with prior breast cancer, augmentation, or use of agents known to affect density were excluded. The main sample included 89 639 women with both FS and digital mammograms. The comparison group included 259 046 women with two FS mammograms and 87 066 women with two digital mammograms. BI-RADS density was cross-tabulated according to the order in which the two types of mammogram were acquired and by the first versus second interpretation.ResultsRegardless of acquisition method, the percentage of women with a change in density from one reading to the next was similar. Breast density was lower in 19.8% of the women who underwent FS before digital mammography and 17.1% of those who underwent digital before FS mammography. Similarly, lower density classifications were reported on the basis of the second mammographic examination regardless of acquisition method (15.8%-19.8%). The percentage of agreement between density readings was similar regardless of mammographic types paired (67.3%-71.0%).ConclusionThe study results showed no difference in reported BI-RADS breast density categories according to acquisition method. Reported BI-RADS density categories may be useful in the development of breast cancer risk models in which FS, digital, or both acquisition methods are used.

Project description:IntroductionMammographic density has been established as a strong risk factor for breast cancer, primarily using digitized film mammograms. Full-field digital mammography (FFDM) is replacing film mammography, has different properties than film, and provides both raw and processed clinical display representation images. We evaluated and compared FFDM raw and processed breast density measures and their associations with breast cancer.MethodsA case-control study of 180 cases and 180 controls matched by age, postmenopausal hormone use, and screening history was conducted. Mammograms were acquired from a General Electric Senographe 2000D FFDM unit. Percent density (PD) was assessed for each FFDM representation using the operator-assisted Cumulus method. Reproducibility within image type (n = 80) was assessed using Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (rc). Correlation of PD between image representations (n = 360) was evaluated using Pearson's correlation coefficient (r) on the continuous measures and the weighted kappa statistic (?) for quartiles. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for the PD and breast cancer associations for both image representations with 95% confidence intervals. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was used to assess the discriminatory accuracy.ResultsPercent density from the two representations provided similar intra-reader reproducibility (rc= 0.92 for raw and rc= 0.87 for processed images) and was correlated (r = 0.82 and ? = 0.64). When controlling for body mass index, the associations of quartiles of PD with breast cancer and discriminatory accuracy were similar for the raw (OR: 1.0 (ref.), 2.6 (1.2 to 5.4), 3.1 (1.4 to 6.8), 4.7 (2.1 to 10.6); AUC = 0.63) and processed representations (OR: 1.0 (ref.), 2.2 (1.1 to 4.1), 2.2 (1.1 to 4.4), 3.1 (1.5 to 6.6); AUC = 0.64).ConclusionsPercent density measured with an operator-assisted method from raw and processed FFDM images is reproducible and correlated. Both percent density measures provide similar associations with breast cancer.

Project description:Background Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density categories assigned by interpreting radiologists often influence decisions surrounding supplemental breast cancer screening and risk assessment. The landscape of mammographic screening continuously evolves, and different mammographic screening modalities may result in different perception of density, reflected in different assignment of BI-RADS density categories. Purpose To investigate the effect of screening mammography modality on BI-RADS breast density assessments. Materials and Methods Data were retrospectively analyzed from 24 736 individual women (42.3% [10 455 of 24 736] white women, 57.7% [14 281 of 24 736] black women; mean age, 56.3 years; age range, 40.0-74.9 years) who underwent from one to seven mammographic screening examinations from September 2010 through February 2017 (60 766 examinations). Three screening modalities were used: digital mammography alone (8935 examinations); digital mammography with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT; 30 779 examinations); and synthetic mammography with DBT (21 052 examinations). Random-effects logistic regression analysis was performed to estimate the likelihood of assignment to high versus low BI-RADS density category according to each modality, adjusted for ethnicity, age, body mass index (BMI), and radiologist. The interactions of modality with ethnicity and BMI on density categorization were also tested with the model. Results Women screened with DBT versus digital mammography alone had lower likelihood regarding categorization of high density breasts (digital mammography and DBT vs digital mammography: odds ratio, 0.69 [95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.80], P < .001; synthetic mammography and DBT vs digital mammography: odds ratio, 0.43 [95% confidence interval: 0.37, 0.50], P < .001). Lower likelihood of high density was also observed at synthetic mammography and DBT compared with digital mammography and DBT (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval: 0.56, 0.69; P < .001). There were interactions of modality with ethnicity (P = .007) and BMI (P = .003) on breast density assessment, with greater differences in density categorization according to modality observed for black women than for white women and groups with higher BMI. Conclusion Breast density categorization may vary by screening mammographic modality, and this effect appears to vary by ethnicity and body mass index. © RSNA, 2019 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Philpotts in this issue.

Project description:Optimization of exposure parameters (target, filter, and kVp) in digital mammography necessitates maximization of the image signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), while simultaneously minimizing patient dose. The goal of this study is to compare, for each of the major commercially available full field digital mammography (FFDM) systems, the impact of the selection of technique factors on image SNR and radiation dose for a range of breast thickness and tissue types. This phantom study is an update of a previous investigation and includes measurements on recent versions of two of the FFDM systems discussed in that article, as well as on three FFDM systems not available at that time. The five commercial FFDM systems tested, the Senographe 2000D from GE Healthcare, the Mammomat Novation DR from Siemens, the Selenia from Hologic, the Fischer Senoscan, and Fuji's 5000MA used with a Lorad M-IV mammography unit, are located at five different university test sites. Performance was assessed using all available x-ray target and filter combinations and nine different phantom types (three compressed thicknesses and three tissue composition types). Each phantom type was also imaged using the automatic exposure control (AEC) of each system to identify the exposure parameters used under automated image acquisition. The figure of merit (FOM) used to compare technique factors is the ratio of the square of the image SNR to the mean glandular dose. The results show that, for a given target/filter combination, in general FOM is a slowly changing function of kVp, with stronger dependence on the choice of target/filter combination. In all cases the FOM was a decreasing function of kVp at the top of the available range of kVp settings, indicating that higher tube voltages would produce no further performance improvement. For a given phantom type, the exposure parameter set resulting in the highest FOM value was system specific, depending on both the set of available target/filter combinations, and on the receptor type. In most cases, the AECs of the FFDM systems successfully identified exposure parameters resulting in FOM values near the maximum ones, however, there were several examples where AEC performance could be improved.

Project description:We developed a semi-automated tool to assess mammographic density (MD), a phenotype risk marker for breast cancer (BC), in full-field digital images and evaluated its performance testing its reproducibility, comparing our MD estimates with those obtained by visual inspection and using Cumulus, verifying their association with factors that influence MD, and studying the association between MD measures and subsequent BC risk. Three radiologists assessed MD using DM-Scan, the new tool, on 655 processed images (craniocaudal view) obtained in two screening centers. Reproducibility was explored computing pair-wise concordance correlation coefficients (CCC). The agreement between DM-Scan estimates and visual assessment (semi-quantitative scale, 6 categories) was quantified computing weighted kappa statistics (quadratic weights). DM-Scan and Cumulus readings were compared using CCC. Variation of DM-Scan measures by age, body mass index (BMI) and other MD modifiers was tested in regression mixed models with mammographic device as a random-effect term. The association between DM-Scan measures and subsequent BC was estimated in a case-control study. All BC cases in screening attendants (2007-2010) at a center with full-field digital mammography were matched by age and screening year with healthy controls (127 pairs). DM-Scan was used to blindly assess MD in available mammograms (112 cases/119 controls). Unconditional logistic models were fitted, including age, menopausal status and BMI as confounders. DM-Scan estimates were very reliable (pairwise CCC: 0.921, 0.928 and 0.916). They showed a reasonable agreement with visual MD assessment (weighted kappa ranging 0.79-0.81). DM-Scan and Cumulus measures were highly concordant (CCC ranging 0.80-0.84), but ours tended to be higher (4%-5% on average). As expected, DM-Scan estimates varied with age, BMI, parity and family history of BC. Finally, DM-Scan measures were significantly associated with BC (p-trend=0.005). Taking MD<7% as reference, OR per categories of MD were: OR7%-17%=1.32 (95% CI=0.59-2.99), OR17%-28%=2.28 (95% CI=1.03-5.04) and OR>=29%=3.10 (95% CI=1.35-7.14). Our results confirm that DM-Scan is a reliable tool to assess MD in full-field digital mammograms.

Project description:To investigate the use of the whole-breast sound speed measurement as a marker of breast density (BD), a known risk factor for breast cancer.As part of an ongoing study of breast cancer detection, 249 patients were scanned with a clinical prototype that operates on the principles of ultrasound tomography. Typically, 40-100 sound speed tomograms were reconstructed from the scan data, corresponding to the entire volume of the breast of each patient. The data were used to estimate the volume averaged sound speed (VASS) of the breast for each patient. The corresponding mammograms were used to calculate mammographic percent density (MPD) using CUMULUS software. Film mammograms were available for 164 patients while 85 digital mammograms were available for the remaining patients. Standard statistical techniques were used to determine associations of breast sound speed with a variety of mammographic measures such as percent density, area of dense tissue, and area of nondense tissue. Furthermore, associations of breast sound speed with continuous variables such as age and weight and dichotomous variables such as parity and menopausal status were also assessed.VASS was found to be significantly associated with MPD. The Spearman correlation coefficient (r(s)) between VASS and MPD was found to be 0.77 and 0.71 for film and digital mammography, respectively. VASS was positively correlated with dense areas by mammography, both digital (r(s) = 0.46) and film (r(s) = 0.56). VASS was negatively associated with nondense area by mammography, both digital (r(s) = -0.58) and film (r(s) = -0.63). BD by all methods was less in postmenopausal than in premenopausal women. The MPD was lower in the postmenopausal group (by 6.6%, p < 0.08, for the digital group and 7.73%, p < 0.007, for the film group). The VASS was also lower in the postmenopausal group (by 15 m∕s, p < 0.001 for the digital group and 8 m∕s, p < 0.08, for the film group). The association of MPD with age was characterized with r(s) = -0.06 (p < 0.6) for digital mammography and r(s) = -0.53 (p < 0.002) for film mammography. For weight, the MPD associations were characterized by r(s) = -0.53 (p < 0.0001) for digital mammography and -0.38 (p < 0.0001) for film mammography. The association of VASS with age was r(s) = -0.33 (p < 0.002) for the digital group and -0.17 (p < 0.03) for the film group. For weight, the relationship was characterized with r(s) = -0.45 (p < 0.001) for the digital group and -0.37 (p < 0.0001) for the film group.The association between VASS and MPD is strong for both film and digital mammography, suggesting that VASS is a viable measure of breast density. This result sets the stage for future work that will focus on directly testing the association of VASS with breast cancer risk.

Dataset Information

Reproductive Factors and Mammographic Density: Associations Among 24,840 Women and Comparison of Studies Using Digitized Film-Screen Mammography and Full-Field Digital Mammography.

Publications

Reproductive Factors and Mammographic Density: Associations Among 24,840 Women and Comparison of Studies Using Digitized Film-Screen Mammography and Full-Field Digital Mammography.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets