Literature DB >> 16261410

Mammographic breast density and the Gail model for breast cancer risk prediction in a screening population.

Jeffrey A Tice1, Steven R Cummings, Elad Ziv, Karla Kerlikowske.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Estimating an individual woman's absolute risk for breast cancer is essential for decision making about screening and preventive recommendations. Although the current standard, the Gail model, is well calibrated in populations, it performs poorly for individuals. Mammographic breast density (BD) may improve the predictive accuracy of the Gail model.
METHODS: Prospective observational cohort of 81,777 women in the San Francisco Mammography Registry presenting for mammography during 1993 through 2002 who had no prior diagnosis of breast cancer. Breast density was rated by clinical radiologists using the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System classification (almost entirely fat; scattered fibroglandular densities; heterogeneously dense; extremely dense). Breast cancer cases were identified through linkage to Northern California Surveillance Epidemiology End Results (SEER) program. We compared the predictive accuracy of models with Gail risk, breast density, and the combination. All models were adjusted for age and ethnicity.
RESULTS: During 5.1 years of follow-up, 955 women were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer. The Gail model had modest predictive accuracy (concordance index (c-index) 0.67; 95% CI 0.65-0.68). Adding breast density to the model increased the predictive accuracy to 0.68 (95% CI .66-.70, p < 0.01 compared with the Gail model alone). The model containing only breast density adjusted for age and ethnicity had predictive accuracy equivalent to the Gail model (c-index 0.67, 95% CI 0.65-0.68).
CONCLUSION: The addition of breast density measured by BI-RADS categories minimally improved the predictive accuracy of the Gail model. A model based on breast density alone adjusted for age and ethnicity was as accurate as the Gail model.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16261410     DOI: 10.1007/s10549-005-5152-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat        ISSN: 0167-6806            Impact factor:   4.872


  98 in total

1.  Mammographic density and risk of breast cancer by adiposity: an analysis of four case-control studies.

Authors:  Shannon M Conroy; Christy G Woolcott; Karin R Koga; Celia Byrne; Chisato Nagata; Giske Ursin; Celine M Vachon; Martin J Yaffe; Ian Pagano; Gertraud Maskarinec
Journal:  Int J Cancer       Date:  2011-09-17       Impact factor: 7.396

Review 2.  Clinical and epidemiological issues in mammographic density.

Authors:  Valentina Assi; Jane Warwick; Jack Cuzick; Stephen W Duffy
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2011-12-06       Impact factor: 66.675

3.  A novel automated mammographic density measure and breast cancer risk.

Authors:  John J Heine; Christopher G Scott; Thomas A Sellers; Kathleen R Brandt; Daniel J Serie; Fang-Fang Wu; Marilyn J Morton; Beth A Schueler; Fergus J Couch; Janet E Olson; V Shane Pankratz; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 13.506

4.  Evaluation of a breast cancer risk prediction model expanded to include category of prior benign breast disease lesion.

Authors:  Rulla M Tamimi; Bernard Rosner; Graham A Colditz
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2010-11-01       Impact factor: 6.860

5.  Fully Automated Quantitative Estimation of Volumetric Breast Density from Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Images: Preliminary Results and Comparison with Digital Mammography and MR Imaging.

Authors:  Said Pertuz; Elizabeth S McDonald; Susan P Weinstein; Emily F Conant; Despina Kontos
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2015-10-21       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Parenchymal texture analysis in digital mammography: robust texture feature identification and equivalence across devices.

Authors:  Brad M Keller; Andrew Oustimov; Yan Wang; Jinbo Chen; Raymond J Acciavatti; Yuanjie Zheng; Shonket Ray; James C Gee; Andrew D A Maidment; Despina Kontos
Journal:  J Med Imaging (Bellingham)       Date:  2015-04-03

7.  Computer-aided assessment of breast density: comparison of supervised deep learning and feature-based statistical learning.

Authors:  Songfeng Li; Jun Wei; Heang-Ping Chan; Mark A Helvie; Marilyn A Roubidoux; Yao Lu; Chuan Zhou; Lubomir M Hadjiiski; Ravi K Samala
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-01-09       Impact factor: 3.609

8.  Mammographic density and breast cancer risk by family history in women of white and Asian ancestry.

Authors:  Gertraud Maskarinec; Kaylae L Nakamura; Christy G Woolcott; Shannon M Conroy; Celia Byrne; Chisato Nagata; Giske Ursin; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2015-03-12       Impact factor: 2.506

9.  Hip bone density predicts breast cancer risk independently of Gail score: results from the Women's Health Initiative.

Authors:  Zhao Chen; Leslie Arendell; Mikel Aickin; Jane Cauley; Cora E Lewis; Rowan Chlebowski
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2008-09-01       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  An automated approach for estimation of breast density.

Authors:  John J Heine; Michael J Carston; Christopher G Scott; Kathleen R Brandt; Fang-Fang Wu; Vernon Shane Pankratz; Thomas A Sellers; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.