TY - JOUR
T1 - Mammographic density assessed on paired raw and processed digital images and on paired screen-film and digital images across three mammography systems
AU - Burton, Anya
AU - Byrnes, Graham
AU - Stone, Jennifer
AU - Tamimi, Rulla M.
AU - Heine, John
AU - Vachon, Celine
AU - Ozmen, Vahit
AU - Pereira, Ana
AU - Garmendia, Maria Luisa
AU - Scott, Christopher
AU - Hipwell, John H.
AU - Dickens, Caroline
AU - Schüz, Joachim
AU - Aribal, Mustafa Erkin
AU - Bertrand, Kimberly
AU - Kwong, Ava
AU - Giles, Graham G.
AU - Hopper, John
AU - Pérez Gómez, Beatriz
AU - Pollán, Marina
AU - Teo, Soo Hwang
AU - Mariapun, Shivaani
AU - Taib, Nur Aishah Mohd
AU - Lajous, Martín
AU - Lopez-Riduara, Ruy
AU - Rice, Megan
AU - Romieu, Isabelle
AU - Flugelman, Anath Arzee
AU - Ursin, Giske
AU - Qureshi, Samera
AU - Ma, Huiyan
AU - Lee, Eunjung
AU - Sirous, Reza
AU - Sirous, Mehri
AU - Lee, Jong Won
AU - Kim, Jisun
AU - Salem, Dorria
AU - Kamal, Rasha
AU - Hartman, Mikael
AU - Miao, Hui
AU - Chia, Kee Seng
AU - Nagata, Chisato
AU - Vinayak, Sudhir
AU - Ndumia, Rose
AU - van Gils, Carla H.
AU - Wanders, Johanna O.P.
AU - Peplonska, Beata
AU - Bukowska, Agnieszka
AU - Allen, Steve
AU - Vinnicombe, Sarah
AU - Moss, Sue
AU - Chiarelli, Anna M.
AU - Linton, Linda
AU - Maskarinec, Gertraud
AU - Yaffe, Martin J.
AU - Boyd, Norman F.
AU - dos-Santos-Silva, Isabel
AU - McCormack, Valerie A.
N1 - Funding Information:
ML received a non-restricted investigator-initiated grant from AstraZeneca and minor support from Swiss Re.
Funding Information:
This work was supported by the US National Cancer Institute at the National Institutes of Health (R03CA167771) and by the International Agency for Research on Cancer.
Funding Information:
The authors would like to thank BreastScreen Victoria and Dr Ralph Highnam for the facilitation of image acquisition. Previous studies were supported by: Australia—Australian National Breast Cancer Foundation (to JSt), MCCS by VicHealth, Cancer Council Victoria and Australian NHMRC grants 209057, 251553 and 504711, and cases and their vital status were ascertained through the Victorian Cancer Registry (VCR) and the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW), including the National Death Index and the Australian Cancer Database; Canada—National Cancer Institute of Canada (to NFB); Chile—Fondecyt 11100238 (to MLG), 1120326, 1130277 and 3130532, World Cancer Research Fund 2010/245, Ellison Medical Foundation Grant (to AP); Iran—Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, and assistance from Dr Vida Razavi and Dr Shamila Razavi; Israel—The Israel Cancer Association; Republic of Korea—Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea, Grant No. 2010–0811; Malaysia—Sime Darby LPGA Tournament, Ministry of Education University Malaya High Impact Research Grant UM.C/HIR/MOHE/06 and University Malaya Research Grant (UMRG Grant No.: RP046B-15HTM); Mexico—Ministry of Education of Mexico and ISSSTE’s Medical Directorate staff and regional office in Jalisco for technical and administrative support, National Council of Science and Technology (Mexico) and the American Institute for Cancer Research (10A035); the Netherlands—EPIC-NL-Europe against Cancer Programme of the European Commission (SANCO), Dutch Ministry of Health, Dutch Cancer Society, ZonMW the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development, and the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF); Poland—Polish–Norwegian Research Programme (PNRF– 243–AI–1/07); Singapore—Clinician Scientist Award from National Medical Research Council and National University Cancer Institute Singapore (NCIS) Centre grant programme from National Medical Research Council; South Africa—Pink Drive; Spain—Spain’s Health Research Fund (Fondo de Investigacion Santiaria) PI060386 and PS09/0790, and Spanish Federation of Breast Cancer Patients (FECMA) EPY1169-10; Turkey—Roche Mustahzarlari San. A.S., Istanbul, Turkey; UK—EPSRC and EP/K020439/1 (JHH), Breast Cancer Campaign (2007MayPR23), Cancer Research UK (G186/11; C405/A14565), Da Costa Foundation; USA—National Cancer Institute R01CA85265, R37 CA54281, R01 CA97396, P50 CA116201, R01 CA177150 and R01 CA140286, Cancer Center Support Grant CA15083, CA131332, CA124865, UM1 CA186107 and UM1 CA176726 and the Susan G. Komen Foundation.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2016 The Author(s).
PY - 2016/12/19
Y1 - 2016/12/19
N2 - Background: Inter-women and intra-women comparisons of mammographic density (MD) are needed in research, clinical and screening applications; however, MD measurements are influenced by mammography modality (screen film/digital) and digital image format (raw/processed). We aimed to examine differences in MD assessed on these image types. Methods: We obtained 1294 pairs of images saved in both raw and processed formats from Hologic and General Electric (GE) direct digital systems and a Fuji computed radiography (CR) system, and 128 screen-film and processed CR-digital pairs from consecutive screening rounds. Four readers performed Cumulus-based MD measurements (n=3441), with each image pair read by the same reader. Multi-level models of square-root percent MD were fitted, with a random intercept for woman, to estimate processed-raw MD differences. Results: Breast area did not differ in processed images compared with that in raw images, but the percent MD was higher, due to a larger dense area (median 28.5 and 25.4cm2 respectively, mean √dense area difference 0.44cm (95% CI: 0.36, 0.52)). This difference in √dense area was significant for direct digital systems (Hologic 0.50cm (95% CI: 0.39, 0.61), GE 0.56cm (95% CI: 0.42, 0.69)) but not for Fuji CR (0.06cm (95% CI: 0.10, 0.23)). Additionally, within each system, reader-specific differences varied in magnitude and direction (p<0.001). Conversion equations revealed differences converged to zero with increasing dense area. MD differences between screen-film and processed digital on the subsequent screening round were consistent with expected time-related MD declines. Conclusions: MD was slightly higher when measured on processed than on raw direct digital mammograms. Comparisons of MD on these image formats should ideally control for this non-constant and reader-specific difference.
AB - Background: Inter-women and intra-women comparisons of mammographic density (MD) are needed in research, clinical and screening applications; however, MD measurements are influenced by mammography modality (screen film/digital) and digital image format (raw/processed). We aimed to examine differences in MD assessed on these image types. Methods: We obtained 1294 pairs of images saved in both raw and processed formats from Hologic and General Electric (GE) direct digital systems and a Fuji computed radiography (CR) system, and 128 screen-film and processed CR-digital pairs from consecutive screening rounds. Four readers performed Cumulus-based MD measurements (n=3441), with each image pair read by the same reader. Multi-level models of square-root percent MD were fitted, with a random intercept for woman, to estimate processed-raw MD differences. Results: Breast area did not differ in processed images compared with that in raw images, but the percent MD was higher, due to a larger dense area (median 28.5 and 25.4cm2 respectively, mean √dense area difference 0.44cm (95% CI: 0.36, 0.52)). This difference in √dense area was significant for direct digital systems (Hologic 0.50cm (95% CI: 0.39, 0.61), GE 0.56cm (95% CI: 0.42, 0.69)) but not for Fuji CR (0.06cm (95% CI: 0.10, 0.23)). Additionally, within each system, reader-specific differences varied in magnitude and direction (p<0.001). Conversion equations revealed differences converged to zero with increasing dense area. MD differences between screen-film and processed digital on the subsequent screening round were consistent with expected time-related MD declines. Conclusions: MD was slightly higher when measured on processed than on raw direct digital mammograms. Comparisons of MD on these image formats should ideally control for this non-constant and reader-specific difference.
KW - Breast cancer
KW - Breast density
KW - Image processing
KW - Mammographic density assessment
KW - Methods
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85006762123&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s13058-016-0787-0
DO - 10.1186/s13058-016-0787-0
M3 - Article
C2 - 27993168
AN - SCOPUS:85006762123
SN - 1465-5411
VL - 18
JO - Breast Cancer Research
JF - Breast Cancer Research
IS - 1
M1 - 130
ER -