Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Beyond BI-RADS Density: A Call for Quantification in the Breast Imaging Clinic

2018; Radiological Society of North America; Volume: 286; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1148/radiol.2017170644

1527-1315

Emily F. Conant, Brian L. Sprague, Despina Kontos,

AI in cancer detection

HomeRadiologyVol. 286, No. 2 PreviousNext Reviews and CommentaryOpinionBeyond BI-RADS Density: A Call for Quantification in the Breast Imaging ClinicEmily F. Conant , Brian L. Sprague, Despina KontosEmily F. Conant , Brian L. Sprague, Despina KontosAuthor AffiliationsFrom the Department of Radiology, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce St, Philadelphia PA 10104 (E.F.C., D.K.); and Departments of Surgery and Radiology, University of Vermont Cancer Center, Burlington, Vt (B.L.S.).Address correspondence to E.F.C. (e-mail: [email protected]).Emily F. Conant Brian L. SpragueDespina KontosPublished Online:Jan 22 2018https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2017170644MoreSectionsFull textPDF ToolsImage ViewerAdd to favoritesCiteTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked In AbstractUltimately, the incorporation of automated quantitative measures of breast density will lead to more effective clinical care and more robust outcomes research than the current, subjective assignment of Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System density categories, by providing reproducible estimates of both the risk of masking a cancer as well as the risk of developing breast cancer—two important factors in determining personalized breast cancer screening algorithms.References1. Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN, et al. Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2015;162(10):673–681. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar2. Harvey JA, Yaffe MJ, D'Orsi C, Sickles EA. Density and breast cancer risk. Radiology 2013;267(2):657–658. Link, Google Scholar3. Ng KH, Lau S. Vision 20/20: Mammographic breast density and its clinical applications. Med Phys 2015;42(12):7059–7077. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar4. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Bronskill M, Yaffe MJ, Duric N, Minkin S. Breast tissue composition and susceptibility to breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102(16):1224–1237. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar5. Kressin NR, Gunn CM, Battaglia TA. Content, readability, and understandability of dense breast notifications by state. JAMA 2016;315(16):1786–1788. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar6. Slanetz PJ, Freer PE, Birdwell RL. Breast-density legislation–practical considerations. N Engl J Med 2015;372(7):593–595. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar7. Breast Density and Mammography Reporting Act of 2015, §370. 2015. Google Scholar8. Haas JS, Kaplan CP. The divide between breast density notification laws and evidence-based guidelines for breast cancer screening: legislating practice. JAMA Intern Med 2015;175(9):1439–1440. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar9. Burnside ES, Sickles EA, Bassett LW, et al. The ACR BI-RADS experience: learning from history. J Am Coll Radiol 2009;6(12):851–860. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar10. American College of Radiology. ACR BI-RADS Atlas—Mammography. 4th ed. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2003. Google Scholar11. American College of Radiology. ACR BI-RADS Atlas—Mammography. 5th ed. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2013. Google Scholar12. Winkler NS, Raza S, Mackesy M, Birdwell RL. Breast density: clinical implications and assessment methods. RadioGraphics 2015;35(2):316–324. Link, Google Scholar13. Ekpo EU, Ujong UP, Mello-Thoms C, McEntee MF. Assessment of interradiologist agreement regarding mammographic breast density classification using the fifth edition of the BI-RADS Atlas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016;206(5):1119–1123. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar14. Ciatto S, Bernardi D, Calabrese M, et al. A first evaluation of breast radiological density assessment by QUANTRA software as compared to visual classification. Breast 2012;21(4):503–506. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar15. Ng KH, Yip CH, Taib NA. Standardisation of clinical breast-density measurement. Lancet Oncol 2012;13(4):334–336. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar16. Ooms EA, Zonderland HM, Eijkemans MJ, et al. Mammography: interobserver variability in breast density assessment. Breast 2007;16(6):568–576. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar17. Sprague BL, Conant EF, Onega T, et al. Variation in mammographic breast density assessments among radiologists in clinical practice: a multicenter observational study. Ann Intern Med 2016;165(7):457–464. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar18. Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Hubbard RA, et al. Outcomes of screening mammography by frequency, breast density, and postmenopausal hormone therapy. JAMA Intern Med 2013;173(9):807–816. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar19. Irshad A, Leddy R, Ackerman S, et al. Effects of changes in BI-RADS density assessment guidelines (fourth versus fifth edition) on breast density assessment: intra- and interreader agreements and density distribution. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2016;207(6):1366–1371. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar20. Zuckerman S, Maidment AD, Weinstein SP, McDonald E, Conant EF. Imaging with synthetic mammography: differences, advantages and pitfalls compared to digital mammography. Radiology 2018;28#(#):###–###. Google Scholar21. Zuckerman SP, Conant EF, Keller BM, et al. Implementation of synthesized two-dimensional mammography in a population-based digital breast tomosynthesis screening program. Radiology 2016;281(3):730–736. Link, Google Scholar22. Aujero MP, Gavenonis SC, Benjamin R, Zhang Z, Holt JS. Clinical performance of synthesized two-dimensional mammography combined with tomosynthesis in a large screening population. Radiology 2017;283(1):70–76. Link, Google Scholar23. Keller BM, Nathan DL, Gavenonis SC, Chen J, Conant EF, Kontos D. Reader variability in breast density estimation from full-field digital mammograms: the effect of image postprocessing on relative and absolute measures. Acad Radiol 2013;20(5):560–568. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar24. Bahl M, Baker JA, Bhargavan-Chatfield M, Brandt EK, Ghate SV. Impact of breast density notification legislation on radiologists' practices of reporting breast density: a multi-state study. Radiology 2016;280(3):701–706. Link, Google Scholar25. Sprague BL, Gangnon RE, Burt V, et al. Prevalence of mammographically dense breasts in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 2014;106(10):dju255. Crossref, Google Scholar26. Byng JW, Boyd NF, Fishell E, Jong RA, Yaffe MJ. Automated analysis of mammographic densities. Phys Med Biol 1996;41(5):909–923. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar27. Heine JJ, Carston MJ, Scott CG, et al. An automated approach for estimation of breast density. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008;17(11):3090–3097. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar28. Keller BM, Nathan DL, Wang Y, et al. Estimation of breast percent density in raw and processed full field digital mammography images via adaptive fuzzy c-means clustering and support vector machine segmentation. Med Phys 2012;39(8):4903–4917. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar29. Heine JJ, Scott CG, Sellers TA, et al. A novel automated mammographic density measure and breast cancer risk. J Natl Cancer Inst 2012;104(13):1028–1037. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar30. Keller BM, Chen J, Daye D, Conant EF, Kontos D. Preliminary evaluation of the publicly available Laboratory for Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA) software tool: comparison of fully automated area and volumetric density measures in a case-control study with digital mammography. Breast Cancer Res 2015;17(1):117. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar31. Brandt KR, Scott CG, Ma L, et al. Comparison of clinical and automated breast density measurements: implications for risk prediction and supplemental screening. Radiology 2016;279(3):710–719. Link, Google Scholar32. Destounis S, Johnston L, Highnam R, Arieno A, Morgan R, Chan A. Using volumetric breast density to quantify the potential masking risk of mammographic density. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2017;208(1):222–227. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar33. Holland K, van Zelst J, den Heeten GJ, et al. Consistency of breast density categories in serial screening mammograms: A comparison between automated and human assessment. Breast 2016;29:49–54. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar34. American College of Radiology. ACR statement on reporting breast density in mammography reports and patient summaries. http://www.acr.org/About-Us/Media-Center/Position-Statements/Position-Statements-Folder/Statement-on-Reporting-Breast-Density-in-Mammography-Reports-and-Patient-Summaries. Published 2012. Accessed March 16, 2016. Google Scholar35. Gastounioti A, Conant EF, Kontos D. Beyond breast density: a review on the advancing role of parenchymal texture analysis in breast cancer risk assessment. Breast Cancer Res 2016;18(1):91. Crossref, Medline, Google ScholarArticle HistoryReceived March 22, 2017; revision requested April 18; revision received June 3; accepted June 26; final version accepted June 27.Published online: Jan 22 2018Published in print: Feb 2018 FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited ByMammography biomarkers of cardiovascular and musculoskeletal health: A reviewVeronicaMagni, DavideCapra, AndreaCozzi, Caterina B.Monti, NazaninMobini, AnnaColarieti, FrancescoSardanelli2023 | Maturitas, Vol. 167Persistent inter-observer variability of breast density assessment using BI-RADS® 5th edition guidelinesLeah H.Portnow, DianneGeorgian-Smith, IrfanullahHaider, MirelysBarrios, Camden P.Bay, Kerrie P.Nelson, SughraRaza2022 | Clinical Imaging, Vol. 83Breast Cancer Screening in Women With Dense Breasts: Current Status and Future Directions for Appropriate Risk Stratification and Imaging UtilizationRandy CMiles, Shinn-HueyChou, CharmiVijapura, AmyPatel2022 | Journal of Breast Imaging, Vol. 4, No. 6Multi-Task Fusion for Improving Mammography Screening Data ClassificationMariaWimmer, GertSluiter, DavidMajor, DimitriosLenis, AstridBerg, TheresaNeubauer, KatjaBuhler2022 | IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging, Vol. 41, No. 4BreastScreen Australia national data by factors of interest for risk‐based screening: routinely reported data and opportunities for enhancementChelseaCarle, Louiza S.Velentzis, CarolynNickson2022 | Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, Vol. 46, No. 2Artificial intelligence in mammographic phenotyping of breast cancer risk: a narrative reviewAimiliaGastounioti, ShyamDesai, Vinayak S.Ahluwalia, Emily F.Conant, DespinaKontos2022 | Breast Cancer Research, Vol. 24, No. 1Quantitative breast density analysis to predict interval and node-positive cancers in pursuit of improved screening protocols: a case–control studyElizabeth S.Burnside, Lucy M.Warren, JonathanMyles, Louise S.Wilkinson, Matthew G.Wallis, MishalPatel, Robert A.Smith, Kenneth C.Young, Nathalie J.Massat, Stephen W.Duffy2021 | British Journal of Cancer, Vol. 125, No. 6Evaluation of LIBRA Software for Fully Automated Mammographic Density Assessment in Breast Cancer Risk PredictionAimilia Gastounioti, Christine Damases Kasi, Christopher G. Scott, Kathleen R. Brandt, Matthew R. Jensen, Carrie B. Hruska, Fang F. Wu, Aaron D. Norman, Emily F. Conant, Stacey J. Winham, Karla Kerlikowske, Despina Kontos, Celine M. Vachon, 12 May 2020 | Radiology, Vol. 296, No. 1Immigration history, lifestyle characteristics, and breast density in the Vietnamese American Women's Health Study: a cross-sectional analysisEunjungLee, NamphuongDoanvo, MiHeeLee, ZayarSoe, Alice W.Lee, CamVan Doan, DennisDeapen, GiskeUrsin, DarcySpicer, PeggyReynolds, Anna H.Wu2020 | Cancer Causes & Control, Vol. 31, No. 2Mammographic density and breast cancer screeningR. J.Bell2020 | Climacteric, Vol. 23, No. 5Feasibility and acceptability of personalised breast cancer screening (DECIDO study): protocol of a single-arm proof-of-concept trialAnnaPons-Rodriguez, CarlesForné Izquierdo, JordiVilaplana-Mayoral, InésCruz-Esteve, IsabelSánchez-López, MercèReñé-Reñé, CristinaCazorla, MartaHernández-Andreu, GiselaGalindo-Ortego, MontserratLlorens Gabandé, CelmiraLaza-Vásquez, PauBalaguer-Llaquet, MontserratMartínez-Alonso, MontserratRué2020 | BMJ Open, Vol. 10, No. 12Consumer health informatics approach for personalized cancer screening decisions using utility functionsJohnMaleyeff, DanrongChen2020 | Health Informatics Journal, Vol. 26, No. 4Update on Breast Density, Risk Estimation, and Supplemental ScreeningStamatia V.Destounis, AmandaSantacroce, AndreaArieno2020 | American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol. 214, No. 2Effect of Mammographic Screening Modality on Breast Density Assessment: Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast TomosynthesisAimilia Gastounioti, Anne Marie McCarthy, Lauren Pantalone, Marie Synnestvedt, Despina Kontos, Emily F. Conant, 19 March 2019 | Radiology, Vol. 291, No. 2Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment From the Breast Cancer Surveillance ConsortiumB LSprague, KKerlikowske, E J ABowles, G HRauscher, C ILee, A N ATosteson, D LMiglioretti2019 | JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 111, No. 6Contemporary Risk Management for RadiologistsLeonard Berlin, 10 October 2018 | RadioGraphics, Vol. 38, No. 6Hormonal Effects on Breast Density, Fibroglandular Tissue, and Background Parenchymal EnhancementSamantha L. Heller, Leng Leng Young Lin, Amy N. Melsaether, Linda Moy, Yiming Gao, 1 June 2018 | RadioGraphics, Vol. 38, No. 4Medical Imaging 2018: Image ProcessingAimiliaGastounioti, Meng-KangHsieh, LaurenPantalone, Emily F.Conant, DespinaKontos, Elsa D.Angelini, Bennett A.Landman2018Recommended Articles Comparing Mammographic Density Assessed by Digital Breast Tomosynthesis or Digital Mammography: The Breast Cancer Surveillance ConsortiumRadiology2021Volume: 302Issue: 2pp. 286-292Implementation of Synthesized Two-dimensional Mammography in a Population-based Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Screening ProgramRadiology2016Volume: 281Issue: 3pp. 730-736Impact of Breast Density Notification Legislation on Radiologists' Practices of Reporting Breast Density: A Multi-State StudyRadiology2016Volume: 280Issue: 3pp. 701-706Digital Mammography versus Breast Tomosynthesis: Impact of Breast Density on Diagnostic Performance in Population-based ScreeningRadiology2019Volume: 293Issue: 1pp. 60-68Beyond Breast Density: Risk Measures for Breast Cancer in Multiple Imaging ModalitiesRadiology2023Volume: 306Issue: 3See More RSNA Education Exhibits 2022 New Trends in Breast Density - What Should We Know?Digital Posters2022Contrast-Enhanced Mammography: Current Indications and Future Directions Digital Posters2019Breast Density Included in the Modern Rules of Mammographic ScreeningDigital Posters2019 RSNA Case Collection Invasive Lobular CarcinomaRSNA Case Collection2021Breast edemaRSNA Case Collection2021Invasive ductal carcinoma as developing asymmetryRSNA Case Collection2021 Vol. 286, No. 2 Funding/SupportE.F.C. and D.K. supported by the National Institutes of Health (U54CA163313). B.L.S. supported by the National Institutes of Health (U54CA163303r). AbbreviationsAbbreviations:BI-RADSBreast Imaging and Reporting Data SystemCIconfidence interval Metrics Altmetric Score PDF download