Literature DB >> 20688593

Comparison of breast density measured by dual energy X-ray absorptiometry with mammographic density among adult women in Hawaii.

Gertraud Maskarinec1, Yukiko Morimoto, Yihe Daida, Aurelie Laidevant, Serghei Malkov, John A Shepherd, Rachel Novotny.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While use of mammography is limited, due to concerns related to radiation exposure, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), commonly available in medical care settings, is characterized by low radiation exposure.
METHODS: In the current paper, we compared breast density measured by DXA with mammographic density in 101 adult women who had a screening mammogram during the last 2 years. DXA scans of both breasts were taken using a clinical DXA system calibrated to measure breast density. The total projected breast area was manually delineated on each image and percent fibroglandular volume density (%FGV), absolute fibroglandular volume, total breast area and volume were computed. After digitizing mammographic films, total breast area, dense area, and percent density (PD) were estimated using computer-assisted mammographic density assessment.
RESULTS: Both DXA and mammographic measures showed high correlations between left and right breasts ranging from 0.85 to 0.98 (p<0.0001). Mean %FGV was 38.8±14.3%, and mean percent density was 31.9±18.2% for craniocaudal views and 28.3±16.2% for mediolateral views. The correlation between the two measures was 0.76 for both views (p<0.0001). Associations with common risk factors showed similar patterns for DXA and mammographic densities; in particular, the inverse associations with BMI and age at menarche were evident for both methods. Multilinear regression with stepwise selection indicated an explained variance of 0.56 for %FGV alone and of 0.58 for %FGV plus number of children.
CONCLUSION: Despite some differences in methodology, the current comparison suggests that DXA may provide a low-radiation option in evaluating breast density.
Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20688593      PMCID: PMC3081054          DOI: 10.1016/j.canep.2010.06.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol        ISSN: 1877-7821            Impact factor:   2.984


  19 in total

1.  Clinical comparison of a novel breast DXA technique to mammographic density.

Authors:  John A Shepherd; Lionel Herve; Jessie Landau; Bo Fan; Karla Kerlikowske; Steve R Cummings
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 4.071

2.  Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer.

Authors:  Norman F Boyd; Helen Guo; Lisa J Martin; Limei Sun; Jennifer Stone; Eve Fishell; Roberta A Jong; Greg Hislop; Anna Chiarelli; Salomon Minkin; Martin J Yaffe
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-01-18       Impact factor: 91.245

3.  Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Valerie A McCormack; Isabel dos Santos Silva
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.254

4.  Novel approach to evaluating breast density utilizing ultrasound tomography.

Authors:  Carri Glide; Nebojsa Duric; Peter Littrup
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 4.071

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

Authors:  Jeffrey A Tice; Steven R Cummings; Elad Ziv; Karla Kerlikowske
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 4.872

6.  Mammographic densities during the menopausal transition: a longitudinal study of Australian-born women.

Authors:  Janet R Guthrie; Roger L Milne; John L Hopper; Jennifer Cawson; Lorraine Dennerstein; Henry G Burger
Journal:  Menopause       Date:  2007 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.953

7.  Breast density assessment in adolescent girls using dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry: a feasibility study.

Authors:  John A Shepherd; Serghei Malkov; Bo Fan; Aurelie Laidevant; Rachel Novotny; Gertraud Maskarinec
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 4.254

8.  Mammographic density using two computer-based methods in an isoflavone trial.

Authors:  Masako Kataoka; Charlotte Atkinson; Ruth Warren; Evis Sala; Nicholas E Day; Ralph Highnam; Iqbal Warsi; Sheila A Bingham
Journal:  Maturitas       Date:  2008-05-20       Impact factor: 4.342

9.  Volumetric breast density evaluation from ultrasound tomography images.

Authors:  Carri K Glide-Hurst; Neb Duric; Peter Littrup
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 4.071

10.  Percentage density, Wolfe's and Tabár's mammographic patterns: agreement and association with risk factors for breast cancer.

Authors:  Inger T Gram; Yngve Bremnes; Giske Ursin; Gertraud Maskarinec; Nils Bjurstam; Eiliv Lund
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2005-08-25       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  17 in total

1.  Postmortem validation of breast density using dual-energy mammography.

Authors:  Sabee Molloi; Justin L Ducote; Huanjun Ding; Stephen A Feig
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 2.  Measurement of breast density with digital breast tomosynthesis--a systematic review.

Authors:  E U Ekpo; M F McEntee
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2014-08-22       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  Asian ethnicity is associated with a higher trunk/periphery fat ratio in women and adolescent girls.

Authors:  Yukiko Morimoto; Gertraud Maskarinec; Shannon M Conroy; Unhee Lim; John Shepherd; Rachel Novotny
Journal:  J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-03-01       Impact factor: 3.211

4.  Current and Future Methods for Measuring Breast Density: A Brief Comparative Review.

Authors:  Mark A Sak; Peter J Littrup; Neb Duric; Maeve Mullooly; Mark E Sherman; Gretchen L Gierach
Journal:  Breast Cancer Manag       Date:  2015-08-28

5.  Breast-density assessment with hand-held ultrasound: A novel biomarker to assess breast cancer risk and to tailor screening?

Authors:  Sergio J Sanabria; Orcun Goksel; Katharina Martini; Serafino Forte; Thomas Frauenfelder; Rahel A Kubik-Huch; Marga B Rominger
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2018-03-19       Impact factor: 5.315

6.  Breast density measurements with ultrasound tomography: a comparison with film and digital mammography.

Authors:  Neb Duric; Norman Boyd; Peter Littrup; Mark Sak; Lukasz Myc; Cuiping Li; Erik West; Sal Minkin; Lisa Martin; Martin Yaffe; Steven Schmidt; Muhammad Faiz; Jason Shen; Olga Melnichouk; Qing Li; Teri Albrecht
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.071

7.  Menstrual and reproductive characteristics and breast density in young women.

Authors:  Joanne F Dorgan; Catherine Klifa; Snehal Deshmukh; Brian L Egleston; John A Shepherd; Peter O Kwiterovich; Linda Van Horn; Linda G Snetselaar; Victor J Stevens; Alan M Robson; Norman L Lasser; Nola M Hylton
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2013-08-10       Impact factor: 2.506

8.  Opportunistic Breast Density Assessment in Women Receiving Low-dose Chest Computed Tomography Screening.

Authors:  Jeon-Hor Chen; Siwa Chan; Nan-Han Lu; Yifan Li; Yu Chieh Tsai; Po Yun Huang; Chia-Ju Chang; Min-Ying Su
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2016-06-06       Impact factor: 3.173

9.  Bioimpedence to Assess Breast Density as a Risk Factor for Breast Cancer in Adult Women and Adolescent Girls.

Authors:  Gertraud Maskarinec; Yukiko Morimoto; Michelle B Laguana; Rachel Novotny; Rachael T Leon Guerrero
Journal:  Asian Pac J Cancer Prev       Date:  2016

10.  Height, adiposity and body fat distribution and breast density in young women.

Authors:  Joanne F Dorgan; Catherine Klifa; John A Shepherd; Brian L Egleston; Peter O Kwiterovich; John H Himes; Kelley Gabriel; Linda Horn; Linda G Snetselaar; Victor J Stevens; Bruce A Barton; Alan M Robson; Norman L Lasser; Snehal Deshmukh; Nola M Hylton
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2012-07-13       Impact factor: 6.466

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.