Literature DB >> 22607064

Reproducibility of BI-RADS breast density measures among community radiologists: a prospective cohort study.

Mary C Spayne1, Charlotte C Gard, Joan Skelly, Diana L Miglioretti, Pamela M Vacek, Berta M Geller.   

Abstract

Using data from the Vermont Breast Cancer Surveillance System (VBCSS), we studied the reproducibility of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast density among community radiologists interpreting mammograms in a cohort of 11,755 postmenopausal women. Radiologists interpreting two or more film-screen screening or bilateral diagnostic mammograms for the same woman within a 3- to 24-month period during 1996-2006 were eligible. We observed moderate-to-substantial overall intra-rater agreement for use of BI-RADS breast density in clinical practice, with an overall intra-radiologist percent agreement of 77.2% (95% confidence interval (CI), 74.5-79.5%), an overall simple kappa of 0.58 (95% CI, 0.55-0.61), and an overall weighted kappa of 0.70 (95% CI, 0.68-0.73). Agreement exhibited by individual radiologists varied widely, with intra-radiologist percent agreement ranging from 62.1% to 87.4% and simple kappa ranging from 0.19 to 0.69 across individual radiologists. Our findings underscore the need for additional evaluation of the BI-RADS breast density categorization system in clinical practice.
© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22607064      PMCID: PMC3660069          DOI: 10.1111/j.1524-4741.2012.01250.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast J        ISSN: 1075-122X            Impact factor:   2.431


  47 in total

1.  Weighted kappa: nominal scale agreement with provision for scaled disagreement or partial credit.

Authors:  J Cohen
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1968-10       Impact factor: 17.737

2.  Quantitative evaluation of mammographic densities: a comparison of methods of assessment.

Authors:  H Lee-Han; G Cooke; N F Boyd
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 2.497

3.  Mammographic signs of potential relevance to breast cancer risk: the agreement of radiologists' classification.

Authors:  R Jong; E Fishell; L Little; G Lockwood; N F Boyd
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  1996-08       Impact factor: 2.497

4.  Mammographic findings after breast cancer treatment with local excision and definitive irradiation.

Authors:  D D Dershaw; B Shank; S Reisinger
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1987-08       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  Diet, mammographic features of breast tissue, and breast cancer risk.

Authors:  J Brisson; R Verreault; A S Morrison; S Tennina; F Meyer
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-07       Impact factor: 4.897

6.  Quantitative classification of mammographic densities and breast cancer risk: results from the Canadian National Breast Screening Study.

Authors:  N F Boyd; J W Byng; R A Jong; E K Fishell; L E Little; A B Miller; G A Lockwood; D L Tritchler; M J Yaffe
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1995-05-03       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  A nested case-control study of mammographic patterns, breast volume, and breast cancer (New York City, NY, United States).

Authors:  I Kato; C Beinart; A Bleich; S Su; M Kim; P G Toniolo
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  1995-09       Impact factor: 2.506

8.  Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status.

Authors:  C Byrne; C Schairer; J Wolfe; N Parekh; M Salane; L A Brinton; R Hoover; R Haile
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  1995-11-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 9.  Evaluation of the breast undergoing lumpectomy and radiation therapy.

Authors:  D D Dershaw
Journal:  Radiol Clin North Am       Date:  1995-11       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 10.  Mammographic density. Measurement of mammographic density.

Authors:  Martin J Yaffe
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2008-06-19       Impact factor: 6.466

View more
  32 in total

1.  Quantra™ should be considered a tool for two-grade scale mammographic breast density classification.

Authors:  Ernest U Ekpo; Mark F McEntee; Mary Rickard; Patrick C Brennan; Jyotsna Kunduri; Delgermaa Demchig; Claudia Mello-Thoms
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-02-16       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Changes in breast cancer risk distribution among Vermont women using screening mammography.

Authors:  Kenyon C Bolton; John L Mace; Pamela M Vacek; Sally D Herschorn; Ted A James; Jeffrey A Tice; Karla Kerlikowske; Berta M Geller; Donald L Weaver; Brian L Sprague
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-06-23       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Awareness of breast density and its impact on breast cancer detection and risk.

Authors:  Deborah J Rhodes; Carmen Radecki Breitkopf; Jeanette Y Ziegenfuss; Sarah M Jenkins; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-03-02       Impact factor: 44.544

4.  Influences of race and breast density on related cognitive and emotion outcomes before mandated breast density notification.

Authors:  Mark Manning; Terrance L Albrecht; Zeynep Yilmaz-Saab; Julie Shultz; Kristen Purrington
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2016-10-10       Impact factor: 4.634

Review 5.  Supplemental Screening for Breast Cancer in Women With Dense Breasts: A Systematic Review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Authors:  Joy Melnikow; Joshua J Fenton; Evelyn P Whitlock; Diana L Miglioretti; Meghan S Weyrich; Jamie H Thompson; Kunal Shah
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2016-01-12       Impact factor: 25.391

6.  One versus Two Breast Density Measures to Predict 5- and 10-Year Breast Cancer Risk.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Charlotte C Gard; Brian L Sprague; Jeffrey A Tice; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2015-03-30       Impact factor: 4.254

7.  Racial Differences in Quantitative Measures of Area and Volumetric Breast Density.

Authors:  Anne Marie McCarthy; Brad M Keller; Lauren M Pantalone; Meng-Kang Hsieh; Marie Synnestvedt; Emily F Conant; Katrina Armstrong; Despina Kontos
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2016-04-29       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Prevalence of mammographically dense breasts in the United States.

Authors:  Brian L Sprague; Ronald E Gangnon; Veronica Burt; Amy Trentham-Dietz; John M Hampton; Robert D Wellman; Karla Kerlikowske; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2014-09-12       Impact factor: 13.506

9.  Outcomes of screening mammography by frequency, breast density, and postmenopausal hormone therapy.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Weiwei Zhu; Rebecca A Hubbard; Berta Geller; Kim Dittus; Dejana Braithwaite; Karen J Wernli; Diana L Miglioretti; Ellen S O'Meara
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-05-13       Impact factor: 21.873

10.  Increased Risk of Developing Breast Cancer after a False-Positive Screening Mammogram.

Authors:  Louise M Henderson; Rebecca A Hubbard; Brian L Sprague; Weiwei Zhu; Karla Kerlikowske
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 4.254

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.