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.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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