Using Volumetric Breast Density to Quantify the Potential Masking Risk of Mammographic Density

AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Jan;208(1):222-227. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16489. Epub 2016 Nov 8.

Abstract

Objective: The purposes of this study were to compare BI-RADS density categories with quantitative volumetric breast density (VBD) for the reporting of mammographic sensitivity and to identify which patient factors are most predictive of a diagnosis of interval cancer of the breast versus screen-detected cancer.

Materials and methods: This retrospective study included screen-detected cancers (n = 652) and interval cancers (n = 119) identified between January 2009 and December 2012. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine which patient factors are predictive of a diagnosis of interval cancer. Sensitivity (screen-detected cancer / [screen-detected cancer + interval cancer]) was determined with the BI-RADS 4th edition density categories and an automated equivalent density grade obtained with a proprietary tool. Sensitivity changes within automated density grade categories were investigated by use of quantitative thresholds at the midpoints of each category.

Results: In univariate analysis, age, menopausal status, and breast density were associated with a diagnosis of interval cancer. Of these risk factors, breast density was the only independent factor whether it was assessed by visual BI-RADS category (odds ratio, 3.54; 95% CI, 1.55-8.10), automated density grade (odds ratio, 4.68; 95% CI, 2.26-9.67), or VBD (odds ratio, 4.51; 95% CI, 1.92-10.61). Sensitivity decreased consistently across increasing automated density grade categories from fatty to extremely dense (95%, 89%, 83%, 65%) and less so for visual BI-RADS (82%, 90%, 84%, 66%). Further dichotomization with VBD cutoffs showed a striking linear relation between VBD and sensitivity (R2 = 0.959).

Conclusion: In this study, breast density was the only risk factor significantly associated with a diagnosis of interval cancer versus screen-detected cancer. Quantitative VBD captures the potential masking risk of breast density more precisely than does the widely used visual BI-RADS density classification system.

Keywords: breast cancer risk; breast density; interval cancer; mammography.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Evaluation Study

MeSH terms

  • Absorptiometry, Photon / standards*
  • Absorptiometry, Photon / statistics & numerical data
  • Breast Neoplasms / diagnostic imaging*
  • Breast Neoplasms / epidemiology*
  • Breast Neoplasms / pathology
  • Early Detection of Cancer / standards*
  • Early Detection of Cancer / statistics & numerical data
  • Humans
  • Imaging, Three-Dimensional / standards*
  • Imaging, Three-Dimensional / statistics & numerical data
  • Mammography / standards*
  • Mammography / statistics & numerical data
  • Middle Aged
  • New York / epidemiology
  • Practice Guidelines as Topic
  • Prevalence
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Risk Assessment / standards
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Tumor Burden
  • United States