Literature DB >> 27002418

The Impact of Acquisition Dose on Quantitative Breast Density Estimation with Digital Mammography: Results from ACRIN PA 4006.

Lin Chen1, Shonket Ray1, Brad M Keller1, Said Pertuz1, Elizabeth S McDonald1, Emily F Conant1, Despina Kontos1.   

Abstract

Purpose To investigate the impact of radiation dose on breast density estimation in digital mammography. Materials and Methods With institutional review board approval and Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act compliance under waiver of consent, a cohort of women from the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Pennsylvania 4006 trial was retrospectively analyzed. All patients underwent breast screening with a combination of dose protocols, including standard full-field digital mammography, low-dose digital mammography, and digital breast tomosynthesis. A total of 5832 images from 486 women were analyzed with previously validated, fully automated software for quantitative estimation of density. Clinical Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density assessment results were also available from the trial reports. The influence of image acquisition radiation dose on quantitative breast density estimation was investigated with analysis of variance and linear regression. Pairwise comparisons of density estimations at different dose levels were performed with Student t test. Agreement of estimation was evaluated with quartile-weighted Cohen kappa values and Bland-Altman limits of agreement. Results Radiation dose of image acquisition did not significantly affect quantitative density measurements (analysis of variance, P = .37 to P = .75), with percent density demonstrating a high overall correlation between protocols (r = 0.88-0.95; weighted κ = 0.83-0.90). However, differences in breast percent density (1.04% and 3.84%, P < .05) were observed within high BI-RADS density categories, although they were significantly correlated across the different acquisition dose levels (r = 0.76-0.92, P < .05). Conclusion Precision and reproducibility of automated breast density measurements with digital mammography are not substantially affected by variations in radiation dose; thus, the use of low-dose techniques for the purpose of density estimation may be feasible. (©) RSNA, 2016 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27002418      PMCID: PMC4988904          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2016151749

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  31 in total

1.  Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment.

Authors:  W A Berg; C Campassi; P Langenberg; M J Sexton
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 3.959

2.  Categorizing breast mammographic density: intra- and interobserver reproducibility of BI-RADS density categories.

Authors:  S Ciatto; N Houssami; A Apruzzese; E Bassetti; B Brancato; F Carozzi; S Catarzi; M P Lamberini; G Marcelli; R Pellizzoni; B Pesce; G Risso; F Russo; A Scorsolini
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 4.380

3.  Computing mammographic density from a multiple regression model constructed with image-acquisition parameters from a full-field digital mammographic unit.

Authors:  Lee-Jane W Lu; Thomas K Nishino; Tuenchit Khamapirad; James J Grady; Morton H Leonard; Donald G Brunder
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2007-07-30       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  A statistical approach for breast density segmentation.

Authors:  Arnau Oliver; Xavier Lladó; Elsa Pérez; Josep Pont; Erika R E Denton; Jordi Freixenet; Joan Martí
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 4.056

5.  Mammographic breast density and subsequent risk of breast cancer in postmenopausal women according to tumor characteristics.

Authors:  Lusine Yaghjyan; Graham A Colditz; Laura C Collins; Stuart J Schnitt; Bernard Rosner; Celine Vachon; Rulla M Tamimi
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 13.506

6.  Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study.

Authors:  Karla Kerlikowske; Weiwei Zhu; Anna N A Tosteson; Brian L Sprague; Jeffrey A Tice; Constance D Lehman; Diana L Miglioretti
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Breast percent density: estimation on digital mammograms and central tomosynthesis projections.

Authors:  Predrag R Bakic; Ann-Katherine Carton; Despina Kontos; Cuiping Zhang; Andrea B Troxel; Andrew D A Maidment
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2009-05-06       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Reproducibility of visual assessment on mammographic density.

Authors:  Jinnan Gao; Ruth Warren; Helen Warren-Forward; John F Forbes
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2007-07-07       Impact factor: 4.872

9.  Reader variability in breast density estimation from full-field digital mammograms: the effect of image postprocessing on relative and absolute measures.

Authors:  Brad M Keller; Diane L Nathan; Sara C Gavenonis; Jinbo Chen; Emily F Conant; Despina Kontos
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2013-03-05       Impact factor: 3.173

10.  Digital mammographic density and breast cancer risk: a case-control study of six alternative density assessment methods.

Authors:  Amanda Eng; Zoe Gallant; John Shepherd; Valerie McCormack; Jingmei Li; Mitch Dowsett; Sarah Vinnicombe; Steve Allen; Isabel dos-Santos-Silva
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res       Date:  2014-09-20       Impact factor: 6.466

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.