Estimation of percentage breast tissue density: Comparison between digital mammography (2D full field digital mammography) and digital breast tomosynthesis according to different BI-RADS categories

British Journal of Radiology

Volumn 86, Issue 1031, 2013, Pages

  Tagliafico, A S ^a   Tagliafico, G ^b   Cavagnetto, F ^c   Calabrese, M ^c   Houssami, N ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^b CNR   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GENOA   (Italy)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANTHROPOMETRIC PARAMETERS; ARTICLE; BODY MASS; BREAST; BREAST DENSITY; BREAST EXAMINATION; CANCER RISK; CLINICAL CLASSIFICATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIGITAL BREAST TOMOSYNTHESIS; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGING SOFTWARE; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY SYSTEM; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RADIOLOGIST; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOMOGRAPHY; TWO DIMENSIONAL FULL FIELD DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; BREAST TUMOR; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CYTOLOGY; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; IMAGE QUALITY; MAMMOGRAPHY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; PROCEDURES; SOFTWARE;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; SOFTWARE; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY;

EID: 84886711668     PISSN: 00071285     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1259/bjr.20130255     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Lehman CD, Blume JD, Weatherall P, Thickman D, Hylton N, Warner E, et al. Screening women at high risk for breast cancer with mammography and magnetic resonance imaging. Cancer 2005;103: 1898-905. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20971
2. Sardanelli F, Podo F, Santoro F, Manoukian S, Bergonzi S, Trecate G, et al. High Breast Cancer Risk Italian 1 (HIBCRIT-1) Study Multicenter surveillance of women at high genetic breast cancer risk using mammography, ultrasonography, and contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (the high breast cancer risk Italian 1 study): final results. Invest Radiol 2011;46: 94-105.
3. Sardanelli F, Podo F, D'Agnolo G, Verdecchia A, Santaquilani M, Musumeci R, et al. Multicenter comparative multimodality surveillance of women at genetic-familial high risk for breast cancer (HIBCRIT study): interim results. Radiology 2007;242:698-715. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2423051965
4. Harvey JA, Bovbjerg VE. Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. Radiology 2004;230:29-41. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2301020870
5. Houssami N, Kerlikowske K. The impact of breast density on breast cancer risk and breast screening. Curr Breast Cancer Rep 2012. doi:10.1007/s12609- 012-0070-z
6. Highnam R, Jeffreys M, McCormack V, Warren R, Davey Smith G, Brady M. Comparing measurements of breast density. Phys Med Biol 2007;52:5881-95. doi: 10.1088/0031-9155/52/19/010
7. Diorio C, Pollak M, Byrne C, M̂asse B, H́ebert-Croteau N, Yaffe M, et al. Insulinlike growth factor-I, IGF-binding protein-3, and mammographic breast density. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005;14: 1065-73. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-04- 0706
8. Gram IT, Funkhouser E, Tabar L. The Tabar classification of mammographic parenchymal patterns. Eur J Radiol 1997;24: 131-6.
9. Gram IT, Bremnes Y, Ursin G, Maskarinec G, Bjurstam N, Lund E. Percentage density, Wolfe's and Tabar's mammographic patterns: agreement and association with risk factors for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2005;7:R854-861. doi: 10.1186/bcr1308
10. Boyd NF, Byng JW, Jong RA, Fishell EK, Little LE, Miller AB, et al. Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87: 670-5.
11. Li J, Szekely L, Eriksson L, Sundbom A, Czene K, Hall P, et al. High-throughput mammographic density measurement: a tool for risk prediction of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2012;14:R114. doi: 10.1186/bcr3238
12. Tagliafico A, Tagliafico G, Tosto S, Chiesa F, Martinoli C, Derchi LE, et al. Mammographic density estimation: comparison among BI-RADS categories, a semi-automated software and a fully automated one. Breast 2009; 18:35-40. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2008.09.005
13. Tagliafico A, Astengo D, Cavagnetto F, Rosasco R, Rescinito G, Monetti F, et al. One-to-one comparison between digital spot compression view and digital breast tomosynthesis. Eur Radiol 2012;22:539-44
14. Tagliafico A, Tagliafico G, Astengo D, Airaldi S, Calabrese M, Houssami N. Comparative estimation of percentage breast tissue density for digital mammography, digital breast tomosynthesis, and magnetic resonance imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013;138: 311-7. doi: 10.1007/s10549-013-2419-z
15. Gur D, Abrams GS, Chough DM, Ganott MA, Hakim CM, Perrin RL, et al. Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2009;193: 586-91. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.2031
16. Tagliafico A, Tagliafico G, Astengo D, Cavagnetto F, Rosasco R, Rescinito G, et al. Mammographic density estimation: one-toone comparison of digital mammography and digital breast tomosynthesis using fully automated software. Eur Radiol 2012;22: 1265-70. doi: 10.1007/s00330-012-2380-y
17. American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS). Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 1993.
18. Tagliafico A, Calabrese M, Tagliafico G, Resmini E, Martinoli C, Rebora A, et al. Increased mammographic breast density in acromegaly: quantitative and qualitative assessment. Eur J Endocrinol 2011;164:335-40. doi: 10.1530/EJE-10-0896
19. Ciatto S, Bernardi D, Calabrese M, Durando M, Gentilini MA, Mariscotti G, et al. A first evaluation of breast radiological density assessment by QUANTRA software as compared to visual classification. Breast 2012;21: 503-6. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2012.01.005
20. Vachon CM, Fowler EE, Tiffenberg G, Scott CG, Pankratz VS, Sellers TA, et al. Comparison of percent density from raw and processed full-field digital mammography data. Breast Cancer Res 2013;15:R1. doi: 10.1186/bcr3372