Mammographic breast density: Impact on breast cancer risk and implications for screening

Radiographics

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 302-315

  Freer, Phoebe E ^a  

^a MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; ECHOMAMMOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PATHOLOGY; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY; RISK FACTOR;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; RISK FACTORS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 84924727439     PISSN: 02715333     EISSN: 15271323     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/rg.352140106     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Boren WL, Hunter TB, Bjelland JC, Hunt KR. Comparison of breast consistency at palpation with breast density at mammography. Invest Radiol 1990;25(9):1010–1011.
2. Swann CA, Kopans DB, McCarthy KA, White G, Hall DA. Mammographic density and physical assessment of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987;148(3):525–526.
3. Leborgne R. The breast in Roentgen diagnosis. Montevideo, Uruguay: Impresora Uruguaya, 1953.
4. Wolfe JN. Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1976;126(6):1130–1137.
5. D’Orsi CJ, Mendelson EB, Morris EA, et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: ACR BI-RADS. 5th ed. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2012.
6. Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Hubbard RA, et al. Outcomes of screening mammography by frequency, breast density, and postmenopausal hormone therapy. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173(9):807–816.
7. Lee CI, Bassett LW, Lehman CD. Breast density legislation and opportunities for patient-centered outcomes research. Radiology 2012;264(3):632–636.
8. Nicholson BT, LoRusso AP, Smolkin M, Bovbjerg VE, Petroni GR, Harvey JA. Accuracy of assigned BI-RADS breast density category definitions. Acad Radiol 2006;13(9):1143–1149.
9. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, et al. Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998;90(23):1801–1809.
10. Kopans DB. Basic physics and doubts about relationship between mammographically determined tissue density and breast cancer risk. Radiology 2008;246(2):348–353.
11. Ciatto S, Bernardi D, Calabrese M, et al. A first evaluation of breast radiological density assessment by QUANTRA software as compared to visual classification. Breast 2012;21(4):503–506.
12. 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(941):378–382.
13. Alonzo-Proulx O, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ. Volumetric breast density characteristics as determined from digital mammograms. Phys Med Biol 2012;57(22):7443–7457.
14. Vachon CM, Kushi LH, Cerhan JR, Kuni CC, Sellers TA. Association of diet and mammographic breast density in the Minnesota breast cancer family cohort. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2000;9(2):151–160.
15. Carney PA, Miglioretti DL, Yankaskas BC, et al. Individual and combined effects of age, breast density, and hormone replacement therapy use on the accuracy of screening mammography. Ann Intern Med 2003;138(3):168–175.
16. Kerlikowske K, Hubbard RA, Miglioretti DL, et al. Comparative effectiveness of digital versus film-screen mammography in community practice in the United States: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2011;155(8):493–502.
17. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Yaffe MJ, Minkin S. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: current understanding and future prospects. Breast Cancer Res 2011;13(6):223.
18. McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(6):1159–1169.
19. Bae MS, Moon WK, Chang JM, et al. Breast cancer detected with screening US: reasons for nondetection at mammography. Radiology 2014;270(2):369–377.
20. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007;356(3):227–236.
21. Vacek PM, Geller BM. A prospective study of breast cancer risk using routine mammographic breast density measurements. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13(5):715–722.
22. Sickles EA. The use of breast imaging to screen women at high risk for cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 2010;48(5):859–878.
23. Byrne C, Schairer C, Wolfe J, et al. Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995;87(21):1622–1629.
24. Yaghjyan L, Colditz GA, Rosner B, Tamimi RM. Mammographic breast density and subsequent risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women according to the time since the mammogram. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2013;22(6):1110–1117.
25. Cuzick J, Warwick J, Pinney E, et al. Tamoxifen-induced reduction in mammographic density and breast cancer risk reduction: a nested case-control study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103(9):744–752.
26. Li J, Humphreys K, Eriksson L, Edgren G, Czene K, Hall P. Mammographic density reduction is a prognostic marker of response to adjuvant tamoxifen therapy in postmenopausal patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2013;31(18):2249–2256.
27. An Act Requiring Communication of Mammographic Breast Density Information to Patients, Pub Act No. 09-41 (Conn 2009).
28. Breast Density and Mammography Reporting Act, HR 3404, 113th Congress (2013).
29. Pisano ED, Hendrick RE, Yaffe MJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of digital versus film mammography: exploratory analysis of selected population subgroups in DMIST. Radiology 2008;246 (2):376–383.
30. Stout NK, Lee SJ, Schechter CB, et al. Benefits, harms, and costs for breast cancer screening after US implementation of digital mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014;106(6): dju092.
31. Food and Drug Administration. MSQA national statistics. http://www.fda.gov/Radiation-EmittingProducts/Mammo-graphyQualityStandardsActandProgram/FacilityScorecard /ucm113858.htm. Updated August 3, 2014. Accessed August 10, 2014.
32. Roubidoux MA, Bailey JE, Wray LA, Helvie MA. Invasive cancers detected after breast cancer screening yielded a negative result: relationship of mammographic density to tumor prognostic factors. Radiology 2004;230(1):42–48.
33. Buist DS, Porter PL, Lehman C, Taplin SH, White E. Factors contributing to mammography failure in women aged 40-49 years. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96(19):1432–1440.
34. Niklason LT, Christian BT, Niklason LE, et al. Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. Radiology 1997;205(2):399–406.
35. Ciatto S, Houssami N, Bernardi D, et al. Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. Lancet Oncol 2013;14(7):583–589.
36. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Gullien R, et al. Prospective trial comparing full-field digital mammography (FFDM) versus combined FFDM and tomosynthesis in a population-based screening programme using independent double reading with arbitration. Eur Radiol 2013;23(8):2061–2071.
37. Rose SL, Tidwell AL, Bujnoch LJ, Kushwaha AC, Nordmann AS, Sexton R Jr. Implementation of breast tomosynthesis in a routine screening practice: an observational study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013;200(6):1401–1408.
38. Haas BM, Kalra V, Geisel J, Raghu M, Durand M, Philpotts LE. Comparison of tomosynthesis plus digital mammography and digital mammography alone for breast cancer screening. Radiology 2013;269(3):694–700.
39. Friedewald SM, Rafferty EA, Rose SL, et al. Breast cancer screening using tomosynthesis in combination with digital mammography. JAMA 2014;311(24):2499–2507.
40. Rafferty EA, Niklason L, Smith A. Comparison of FFDM with breast tomosynthesis to FFDM alone: performance in fatty and dense breasts. Presented at the Tomosynthesis Imaging Symposium, Duke University, Durham, NC, April 30–May 2, 2009.
41. Skaane P, Bandos AI, Eben EB, et al. Two-view digital breast tomosynthesis screening with synthetically reconstructed projection images: comparison with digital breast tomosynthesis with full-field digital mammographic images. Radiology 2014;271(3):655–663.
42. Zuley ML, Guo B, Catullo VJ, et al. Comparison of two-dimensional synthesized mammograms versus original digital mammograms alone and in combination with tomosynthesis images. Radiology 2014;271(3):664–671.
43. Tice JA, Ollendorf DA, Lee JM, Pearson SD. The comparative clinical effectiveness and value of supplemental screening tests following negative mammography in women with dense breast tissue. California Technology Assessment Forum web site. http://www.ctaf.org/sites/default/files/assessments/ctaf-final-report-dense-breast-imaging-11.04.2013-b.pdf. Published November 4, 2013. Accessed March 7, 2014.
44. NCCN guidelines: breast cancer screening and diagnosis. National Comprehensive Cancer Network web site. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast-screening.pdf. Published July 3, 2013. Accessed March 7, 2014.
45. Parris T, Wakefield D, Frimmer H. Real world performance of screening breast ultrasound following enactment of Connecticut Bill 458. Breast J 2013;19(1):64–70.
46. Weigert J, Steenbergen S. The Connecticut experiment: the role of ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts. Breast J 2012;18(6):517–522.
47. 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(1):59–69.
48. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002; 225(1):165–175.
49. Kaplan SS. Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology 2001;221(3):641–649.
50. Girardi V, Tonegutti M, Ciatto S, Bonetti F. Breast ultrasound in 22,131 asymptomatic women with negative mammography. Breast 2013;22(5):806–809.
51. Leong LC, Gogna A, Pant R, Ng FC, Sim LS. Supplementary breast ultrasound screening in Asian women with negative but dense mammograms: a pilot study. Ann Acad Med Singapore 2012;41(10):432–439.
52. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ghirardi M, et al. Evidence of the effect of adjunct ultrasound screening in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: interval breast cancers at 1 year follow-up. Eur J Cancer 2011;47(7):1021–1026.
53. Corsetti V, Houssami N, Ferrari A, et al. Breast screening with ultrasound in women with mammography-negative dense breasts: evidence on incremental cancer detection and false positives, and associated cost. Eur J Cancer 2008;44(4):539–544.
54. De Felice C, Savelli S, Angeletti M, et al. Diagnostic utility of combined ultrasonography and mammography in the evaluation of women with mammographically dense breasts. J Ultrasound 2007;10(3):143–151.
55. Brancato B, Bonardi R, Catarzi S, et al. Negligible advantages and excess costs of routine addition of breast ultrasonography to mammography in dense breasts. Tumori 2007;93(6):562–566.
56. Leconte I, Feger C, Galant C, et al. Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast density. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;180(6):1675–1679.
57. Crystal P, Strano SD, Shcharynski S, Koretz MJ. Using sonography to screen women with mammographically dense breasts. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181(1):177–182.
58. Buchberger W, Niehoff A, Obrist P, DeKoekkoek-Doll P, Dünser M. Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high-resolution sonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2000;21(4):325–336.
59. Maestro C, Cazenave F, Marcy PY, Bruneton JN, Chauvel C, Bleuse A. Systematic ultrasonography in asymptomatic dense breasts. Eur J Radiol 1998;26(3):254–256.
60. Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA 2008;299(18):2151–2163. [Published correction appears in JAMA 2010;303(15):1482.].
61. Kelly KM, Dean J, Lee SJ, Comulada WS. Breast cancer detection: radiologists’ performance using mammography with and without automated whole-breast ultrasound. Eur Radiol 2010;20(11):2557–2564.
62. Stöblen F, Landt S, Stelkens-Gebhardt R, Sehouli J, Rezai M, Kümmel S. First evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of an automated 3D ultrasound system in a breast screening setting. Anticancer Res 2011;31(8):2569–2574.
63. Giuliano V, Giuliano C. Improved breast cancer detection in asymptomatic women using 3D-automated breast ultrasound in mammographically dense breasts. Clin Imaging 2013;37(3): 480–486.
64. van Gils CH, Utrecht UMC. Breast cancer screening with MRI in women aged 50–75 years with extremely dense breast tissue: the DENSE trial. http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01315015. Published March 14, 2011. Accessed March 7, 2014.
65. Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin 2007;57(2):75–89.
66. Kuhl CK, Schrading S, Leutner CC, et al. Mammography, breast ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging for surveillance of women at high familial risk for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23(33):8469–8476.
67. Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 2004;292(11):1317–1325.
68. Kuhl C, Weigel S, Schrading S, et al. Prospective multicenter cohort study to refine management recommendations for women at elevated familial risk of breast cancer: the EVA trial. J Clin Oncol 2010;28(9):1450–1457.
69. Sardanelli F, Podo F, Santoro F, et al. 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(2):94–105.
70. Warner E, Messersmith H, Causer P, Eisen A, Shumak R, Plewes D. Systematic review: using magnetic resonance imaging to screen women at high risk for breast cancer. Ann Intern Med 2008;148(9):671–679.
71. Berg WA, Zhang Z, Lehrer D, et al. Detection of breast cancer with addition of annual screening ultrasound or a single screening MRI to mammography in women with elevated breast cancer risk. JAMA 2012;307(13):1394–1404.
72. Berg WA, Blume JD, Adams AM, et al. Reasons women at elevated risk of breast cancer refuse breast MR imaging screening: ACRIN 6666. Radiology 2010;254(1):79–87.
73. Smith RA, Duffy SW, Gabe R, Tabar L, Yen AM, Chen TH. The randomized trials of breast cancer screening: what have we learned? Radiol Clin North Am 2004;42(5):793–806, v.
74. Freer PE, Kopans DB. Screening for breast cancer: mammography and other modalities. In: Taghian AG, Smith BL, Erban JK, eds. Breast cancer: a multidisciplinary approach to diagnosis and management. New York, NY: Demos Medical, 2010; 18–36.
75. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 2004;351 (5):427–437.
76. Mainiero MB, Lourenco A, Mahoney MC, et al. ACR Appropriateness Criteria Breast Cancer Screening. J Am Coll Radiol 2013;10(1):11–14.
77. Mann RM, Kuhl CK, Kinkel K, Boetes C. Breast MRI: guidelines from the European Society of Breast Imaging. Eur Radiol 2008;18(7):1307–1318.
78. Committee on Gynecologic Practice. ACOG committee opinion no. 593: management of women with dense breasts diagnosed by mammography. Obstet Gynecol 2014;123(4):910–911.
79. Gartlehner G, Thaler KJ, Chapman A, et al. Adjunct ultrasonography for breast cancer screening in women at average risk: a systematic review. Int J Evid-Based Healthc 2013;11(2):87–93.
80. Questions for deliberation. California Technology Assessment Forum web site. http://www.ctaf.org/sites/default/files/u39/Vot ing%20question%20main_results.pdf. Published 2013. Accessed March 18, 2014.
81. An action guide for supplemental cancer screening for women with dense breasts: next steps for patients, clinicians, and insurers. New England Comparative Effectiveness Public Advisory Council (CEPAC) web site. http://cepac.icer-review.org/wp -content/uploads/2013/11/Action-Guide-Dense-Breast-Final.pdf. Published March 2014. Accessed March 28, 2014.
82. Lipson JA, Hargreaves J, Price ER. Frequently asked questions about breast density, breast cancer risk, and the Breast Density Notification Law in California: a consensus document. California Breast Density Information Group web site. http://www.breastdensity.info. Published 2013. Accessed March 15, 2014.
83. Tang PC. Patients, clinical decisions, and health information management in the information age. In: Institute of Medicine (US), Olsen LA, Saunders RS, McGinnis JM, eds. Patients charting the course: citizen engagement and the learning health system—workshop summary. Washington, DC: National Academies. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK92062. Published 2011. Accessed March 5, 2014.
84. Ho N, Kim J, Prasad V. Dense breasts and legislating medicine. Cleve Clin J Med 2013;80(12):768–770.
85. Marcus EN, Yepes M. The conundrum of explaining breast density to patients. Cleve Clin J Med 2013;80(12):761–765.