Volumetric breast composition analysis: reproducibility of breast percent density and fibroglandular tissue volume measurements in serial mammograms

Abstract

Background

Volumetric breast composition analysis represents a useful tool for assessing changes in breast composition over time. However, no data exist on the reproducibility of this method in serial mammograms.

Purpose

To assess the reproducibility of two volumetric breast composition parameters, breast percent density (PD) and fibroglandular tissue volume (FTV), in consecutive mammograms.

Material and Methods

Volumetric breast composition analysis to determine PD and FTV was performed in two consecutive unilateral mammograms of 211 patients. All mammograms were obtained on the same digital mammography unit within a maximum interval of 24 months. Volumetric data for analysis for both examinations were available for 174 patients. Thirty-two patients had successful volumetric analysis of additional consecutive examinations on a second digital mammography unit. Inter-examination correlation of measurements and absolute differences were analyzed. Bland-Altman analysis was performed to compare readings from different mammography units.

Results

Mean FTV remained constant over the study period. A reduction in PD of 0.5% and a mean increase in breast volume (BV) of 3% were observed. FTV measurements obtained on the same mammography unit were significantly more reproducible than PD measurements (Pearson correlation coefficients of 0.947 and 0.920, respectively; P < 0.05). A 15% difference between mean absolute volume measurements (FTV and BV) obtained on different mammography units was observed (P ≤ 0.001), while mean PD was close to the expected value.

Conclusion

Volumetric breast composition analysis is highly reproducible in serial mammograms in normal women. FTV is a more reproducible parameter than PD, indicating that absolute quantification of breast parenchyma may be preferable to the measurement of relative parameters such as PD. However, a disadvantage of using FTV is that it is susceptible to systematic differences when measurements are obtained on different imaging platforms.

Keywords

Breast mammography adults computer applications – general technology assessments

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Boyd

Guo

Martin

. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 227–236.

Duffy

Nagtegaal

Astley

. Visually assessed breast density, breast cancer risk and the importance of the craniocaudal view. Breast Cancer Res 2008; 10: R64–R64.

McCormack

dos Santos Silva

. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006; 15: 1159–1169.

Assi

Warwick

Cuzick

. Clinical and epidemiological issues in mammographic density. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2012; 9: 33–40.

Tice

Cummings

Smith-Bindman

. Using clinical factors and mammographic breast density to estimate breast cancer risk: development and validation of a new predictive model. Ann Intern Med 2008; 148: 337–347.

Cuzick

Warwick

Pinney

. Tamoxifen and breast density in women at increased risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96: 621–628.

Cuzick

Warwick

Pinney

. Tamoxifen-induced reduction in mammographic density and breast cancer risk reduction: a nested case-control study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103: 744–752.

Ciatto

Houssami

Apruzzese

. Categorizing breast mammographic density: intra- and interobserver reproducibility of BI-RADS density categories. Breast 2005; 14: 269–275.

Ooms

Zonderland

Eijkemans

. Mammography: interobserver variability in breast density assessment. Breast 2007; 16: 568–576.

10.

Perez-Gomez

Ruiz

Martinez

. Women's features and inter-/intra-rater agreement on mammographic density assessment in full-field digital mammograms (DDM-SPAIN). Breast Cancer Res Treat 2012; 132: 287–295.

11.

Maskarinec

Pagano

Chen

. Ethnic and geographic differences in mammographic density and their association with breast cancer incidence. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2007; 104: 47–56.

12.

Torres-Mejia

De Stavola

Allen

. Mammographic features and subsequent risk of breast cancer: a comparison of qualitative and quantitative evaluations in the Guernsey prospective studies. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2005; 14: 1052–1059.

13.

Vachon

Brandt

Ghosh

. Mammographic breast density as a general marker of breast cancer risk. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007; 16: 43–49.

14.

Wong

Lim

Gao

. Mammographic density and its interaction with other breast cancer risk factors in an Asian population. Br J Cancer 2011; 104: 871–874.

15.

Ursin

. Mammographic density and breast cancer in three ethnic groups. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2003; 12: 332–338.

16.

Dorgan

Klifa

Shepherd

. Height, adiposity and body fat distribution and breast density in young women. Breast Cancer Res 2012; 14: R107–R107.

17.

Boyd

Martin

Gunasekara

. Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: evaluation of a novel method of measuring breast tissue volumes. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009; 18: 1754–1762.

18.

Hutson

Cowen

Bird

. Morphometric studies of age related changes in normal human breast and their significance for evolution of mammary cancer. J Clin Pathol 1985; 38: 281–287.

19.

Walker

Martin

. The aged breast. J Pathol 2007; 211: 232–240.

20.

Ginsburg

Martin

Boyd

. Mammographic density, lobular involution, and risk of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 2008; 99: 1369–1374.

21.

Henson

Tarone

. Involution and the etiology of breast cancer. Cancer 1994; 74: 424–429.

22.

Stone

Warren

Pinney

. Determinants of percentage and area measures of mammographic density. Am J Epidemiol 2009; 170: 1571–1578.

23.

Trichopoulos

Lagiou

Adami

. Towards an integrated model for breast cancer etiology: the crucial role of the number of mammary tissue-specific stem cells. Breast Cancer Res 2005; 7: 13–17.

24.

Byrne

Schairer

Wolfe

. Mammographic features and breast cancer risk: effects with time, age, and menopause status. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995; 87: 1622–1629.

25.

Ciatto

Bernardi

Calabrese

. A first evaluation of breast radiological density assessment by QUANTRA software as compared to visual classification. Breast 2012; 21: 503–506.

26.

Sauber N, Chan A, Highnam R. BI-RADS breast density classification – an international standard? Poster Presentation presented at: European Congress of Radiology. 2013 Mar 7–11; Vienna, Austria.