PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Radiol Imaging 2015; 25(04): 391-396
DOI: 10.4103/0971-3026.169458
Breast Radiology

Evaluation of breast parenchymal density with QUANTRA software

Shivani Pahwa
Department of Radiodiagnosis, All Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
,
Smriti Hari
Department of Radiodiagnosis, All Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
,
Sanjay Thulkar
Department of Radiodiagnosis, All Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
,
Suveen Angraal
Department of Radiodiagnosis, All Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
› Institutsangaben Financial support and sponsorship Nil.
› Weitere Informationen
  als PDF herunterladen Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate breast parenchymal density using QUANTRA software and to correlate numerical breast density values obtained from QUANTRA with ACR BI-RADS breast density categories. Materials and Methods: Two-view digital mammograms of 545 consecutive women (mean age - 47.7 years) were categorized visually by three independent radiologists into one of the four ACR BI-RADS categories (D1-D4). Numerical breast density values as obtained by QUANTRA software were then used to establish the cutoff values for each category using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis. Results: Numerical breast density values obtained by QUANTRA (range - 7-42%) were systematically lower than visual estimates. QUANTRA breast density value of less than 14.5% could accurately differentiate category D1 from the categories D2, D3, and D4 [area under curve (AUC) on ROC analysis - 94.09%, sensitivity - 85.71%, specificity - 84.21%]. QUANTRA density values of <19.5% accurately differentiated categories D1 and D2 from D3 and D4 (AUC - 94.4%, sensitivity - 87.50%, specificity - 84.60%); QUANTRA density values of <26.5% accurately differentiated categories D1, D2, and D3 from category D4 (AUC - 90.75%, sensitivity - 88.89%, specificity - 88.621%). Conclusions: Breast density values obtained by QUANTRA software can be used to obtain objective cutoff values for each ACR BI-RADS breast density category. Although the numerical density values obtained by QUANTRA are lower than visual estimates, they correlate well with the BI-RADS breast density categories assigned visually to the mammograms.

Keywords

BI-RADS breast density categories - breast parenchymal density - computer assessment - mammographic density - QUANTRA software


Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
30. Juli 2021

© 2015. Indian Radiological Association. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2013.CA Cancer J Clin 2013;63:11-30.
  • 2 Harvey JA, Bovbjerg VE. Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: Relationship with breast cancer risk. Radiology 2004;230:29-41.
  • 3 Wolfe JN. Risk for breast cancer development determined by mammographic parenchymal pattern. Cancer 1976;37:2486-92.
  • 4 Ciatto S, Zappa M.A prospective study of the value of mammographic patterns as indicators of breast cancer risk in a screening experience. Eur J Radiol 1993;17:122-5.
  • 5 Boyd NF, Dite GS, Stone J, Gunasekara A, English DR, McCredie MR, et al. Heritability of mammographic density, a risk factorfor breast cancer. New Engl J Med 2002;347:886-94.
  • 6 Chen Z, Wuy AH, Gauderman WJ, Bernstein L, Ma H, Pike MC, et al. Does mammographic density reflect ethnicdifferences in breast cancer incidence rates? Am J Epidemiol 2004;159:140-7.
  • 7 Sickles, EA, D'Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, et al. ACR BI-RADS) Mammography In: ACR BI-RADS® Atlas, Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. Reston, VA, American College of Radiology; 2013.
  • 8 Zhou C, Chan HP, Petrick N, Helvie MA, Goodsitt MM, Sahiner B, et al. Computerized image analysis: Estimation of breast density on mammograms. Med Phys 2001;28:1056-69.
  • 9 Fenton JJ, Taplin SH, Carney PA, Abraham L, Sickles EA, D'Orsi C, et al. Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screeningmammography. N Engl J Med 2007;356:1399-409.
  • 10 Karssemeijer N. Automated classification of parenchymal patterns in mammograms. Phys Med Biol 1998;43:365-78.
  • 11 Sivaramakrishna R, Obuchowski NA, Chilcote WA, Powell KA. Automatic segmentation of mammographic density. Acad Radiol 2001;8:250-6.
  • 12 Chang Y, Wang X, Hardesty LA, Chang TS, Poller WR, Good WF, et al. Computerized assessment of tissue composition on digitized mammograms. Acad Radiol 2002;9:899-905.
  • 13 Martin KE, Helvie MA, Zhou C, Roubidoux MA, Bailey JE, Paramagul C, et al. Mammographic density measured with quantitative computer-aided method: Comparison with radiologists' estimates and BI-RADS categories. Radiology 2006;240:656-65.
  • 14 Ciatto S, Bernardi D, Calabrese M, Durando M, Gentilini MA, Mariscotti G, et al. A first evaluation of breast radiological density assessment by QUANTRA software as compared to visual classification. Breast 2012;21:503-6.
  • 15 Hartman K, Highnam R, Warren R, Jackson V. Volumetric assessment of breast tissue composition from FFDM imagesPaper presented at: IWDM 2008. Proceedings of the International Workshop on Digital Mammography; 2008;5116:33-9; Tucson USA.
  • 16 Byrne C. Studying mammographic density: Implications for understanding breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1997;89:531-3.
  • 17 Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, Sun L, Stone J, Fishell E, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007;356:227-36.
  • 18 McCormackVA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: A meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15:1159-69.
  • 19 Boyd NF, Rommens JM, Vogt K, Lee V, Hopper JL, Yaffe MJ, et al. Mammographic breast density as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer. Lancet Oncol 2005;6:798-808.
  • 20 Veronesi U, Boyle P, Goldhirsch A, Orecchia R, Viale G. Breast cancer. Lancet 2005;365:1727-41.
  • 21 Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, White D, Finder CA, Taplin SH, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: Comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers.J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92:1081-7.
  • 22 Hooley RJ, Greenberg KL, Stackhouse RM, Geisel JL, Butler RS, Philpotts LE. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: Initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09-41. Radiology 2012;265:59-69.
  • 23 Ciatto S, Houssami N, Apruzzese A, Bassetti E, Brancato B, Carozzi F, et al. Categorizing breast mammographic density: Intra- and inter-observer reproducibility of BI-RADS density categories. Breast 2005;14:269-75.
  • 24 Spayne MC, Gard CC, Skelly J, Miglioretti DL, Vacek PM, Geller BM. Reproducibility of BI-RADS breast density measures among community radiologists: A prospective cohort study. Breast J2012;18:326-33.
  • 25 Wolfe JN, Saftlas AF, Salane M. Mammographic parenchymal patterns and quantitative evaluation of mammographic densities: A case-control study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1987;148:1087-92.
  • 26 Saftlas AF, Hoover RN, Brinton LA, Szklo M, Olson DR, Salane M, et al. Mammographic densities and risk of breast cancer. Cancer 1991;67:2833-8.
  • 27 Kato I, Beinart C, Bleich A, Su S, Kim M, Toniolo PG. A nested case-control study of mammographic patterns, breast volume, and breast cancer (New York City, NY, United States). Cancer Causes Control 1995;6:431-8.
  • 28 Byng JW, Yaffe MJ, Jong RA, Shumak RS, Lockwood GA, Tritchler DL, et al. Analysis of mammographic density and breast cancer risk for digitized mammograms. Radiographics 1998;18:1587-98.
  • 29 Freedman M, San Martin J, O'Gorman J, Eckert S, Lippman ME, Lo SC, et al. Digitized mammography: A clinicaltrial of postmenopausal women randomly assigned to receive raloxifene, estrogen, or placebo. J Natl Cancer Inst 2001;93:51-6.
  • 30 Kopans DB. Basic physics and doubts about relationship between mammographically determined tissue density and breast cancer risk. Radiology 2008;246:348-53.
  • 31 Rafferty E, Smith A, Niklason L. Comparison of Three Methods of EstimatingBreast Density: BI-RADS Density Scores Using Full field Digital Mammography, BI-RADS Density Scores Using Breast Tomosynthesis, and Volumetric Breast Density. Paper presented at: RSNA 2009. SSM01-04,155:300-15:40; 2009 Dec 2; Chicago, USA.
  • 32 Tuncbilek N, Sezer A, Uğur U, Ulaş U, Urut U, Coşar R, et al. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of fiquantitative tissue in the digital envi ronment. Paper presented at: National Conference of Breast Disease 2009. 10th National Congress of Breast Diseases; 2009. Izmir, Turkey.