Prediction of glandularity and breast radiation dose from mammography results in Japanese women

AbstractGlandularity has a marked impact on the incidence of breast cancer and the missed lesion rate of mammography. The aim of this study was to develop a novel model for predicting glandularity and patient radiation dose using physical factors that are easily determined prior to mammography. Data regarding glandularity and mean glandular dose were obtained from 331 mammograms. A stepwise multiple regression analysis model was developed to predict glandularity using age, compressed breast thickness and body mass index (BMI), while a model to predict mean glandular dose was created using quantified glandularity, age, compressed breast thickness, height and body weight. The most significant factor for predicting glandularity was age, the influence of which was 1.8 times that of BMI. The most significant factor for predicting mean glandular dose was compressed breast thickness, the influence of which was 1.4 times that of glandularity, 3.5 times that of age and 6.1 times that of height. Both models were statistically significant (both p < 0.0001). Easily determined physical factors were able to explain 42.8% of the total variance in glandularity and 62.4% of the variance in mean glandular dose. Graphical abstractValidation results of the above prediction model made using physical factors in Japanese women. The plotted points of actual vs. prediction glandularity shown in a are distributed in the vicinity of the diagonal line, and the residual plot for predicted glandularity shows an almost random distribution as shown in b. These distributions indicate the appropriateness of the prediction model.

[1]  T. Kahn,et al.  [Radiation exposure in full-field digital mammography with a selenium flat-panel detector]. , 2006, RoFo : Fortschritte auf dem Gebiete der Rontgenstrahlen und der Nuklearmedizin.

[2]  Assessing the Relationship of Mammographic Breast Density and Proliferative Breast Disease , 2016, The breast journal.

[3]  Salim M Adib,et al.  Trends in mammography utilization for breast cancer screening in a Middle-Eastern country: Lebanon 2005-2013. , 2015, Cancer epidemiology.

[4]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Quantification of masking risk in screening mammography with volumetric breast density maps , 2017, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[5]  Priscilla J Slanetz,et al.  Optimizing Digital Mammographic Image Quality for Full-Field Digital Detectors: Artifacts Encountered during the QC Process. , 2015, Radiographics : a review publication of the Radiological Society of North America, Inc.

[6]  J. H. Hubbell,et al.  Tables of X-Ray Mass Attenuation Coefficients and Mass Energy-Absorption Coefficients 1 keV to 20 MeV for Elements Z = 1 to 92 and 48 Additional Substances of Dosimetric Interest , 1995 .

[7]  The development and implementation of a patient-centered radiology consultation service: a focus on breast density and additional screening options. , 2015, Clinical imaging.

[8]  Karla Kerlikowske,et al.  Comparison of Clinical and Automated Breast Density Measurements: Implications for Risk Prediction and Supplemental Screening. , 2016, Radiology.

[9]  Rasha M Kamal,et al.  Missed breast carcinoma; why and how to avoid? , 2007, Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute.

[10]  Koji Maeda,et al.  Compton-scattering measurement of diagnostic x-ray spectrum using high-resolution Schottky CdTe detector. , 2005, Medical physics.

[11]  Mark F McEntee,et al.  Breast density (BD) assessment with digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT): Agreement between Quantra™ and 5th edition BI-RADS®. , 2016, Breast.

[12]  Joshua Demb,et al.  Optimal breast cancer screening strategies for older women: current perspectives , 2016, Clinical interventions in aging.

[13]  E. Fukuma,et al.  Automated volumetric breast density estimation out of digital breast tomosynthesis data: feasibility study of a new software version , 2016, SpringerPlus.

[14]  C. J. Kotre,et al.  Additional factors for the estimation of mean glandular breast dose using the UK mammography dosimetry protocol. , 2000, Physics in medicine and biology.

[15]  P. Mehnati,et al.  Relation between Mammographic Parenchymal Patterns and Breast Cancer Risk: Considering BMI, Compressed Breast Thickness and Age of Women in Tabriz, Iran. , 2016, Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP.

[16]  Samuel J. Magny,et al.  Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System , 2020, Definitions.

[17]  M. McEntee,et al.  Inter‐observer variability in mammographic density assessment using Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) synoptic scales , 2016, Journal of medical imaging and radiation oncology.

[18]  K. Enokido,et al.  Digital volumetric measurement of mammographic density and the risk of overlooking cancer in Japanese women , 2017, Breast Cancer.

[19]  Nico Karssemeijer,et al.  Volumetric breast density estimation from full-field digital mammograms , 2006, IEEE Trans. Medical Imaging.

[20]  D. Dance,et al.  Further factors for the estimation of mean glandular dose using the United Kingdom, European and IAEA breast dosimetry protocols , 2009, Physics in medicine and biology.

[21]  Yoon Jung Choi,et al.  Mammographic Breast Density Evaluation in Korean Women Using Fully Automated Volumetric Assessment , 2016, Journal of Korean medical science.

[22]  Anne Marie McCarthy,et al.  Racial Differences in Quantitative Measures of Area and Volumetric Breast Density. , 2016, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[23]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  Breast dosimetry using high-resolution voxel phantoms. , 2005, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[24]  K. Schenck-Gustafsson,et al.  EMAS position statement: individualized breast cancer screening versus population-based mammography screening programmes. , 2014, Maturitas.

[25]  L. S. Feldt,et al.  THE SELECTION OF VARIABLES IN MULTIPLE REGRESSION ANALYSIS , 1970 .

[26]  R. Hoover,et al.  Longitudinal Change in Mammographic Density among ER-Positive Breast Cancer Patients Using Tamoxifen , 2015, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[27]  Yoshiyuki Asai,et al.  Accurate Quantification of Glandularity and Its Applications with Regard to Breast Radiation Doses and Missed Lesion Rates During Individualized Screening Mammography , 2016, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[28]  T. Kahn,et al.  Strahlenexposition bei der digitalen Vollfeldmammographie mit einem Selen-Flachdetektor , 2006 .

[29]  E. Samei,et al.  Dose dependence of mass and microcalcification detection in digital mammography: free response human observer studies. , 2007, Medical physics.

[30]  K. Czene,et al.  Association of infertility and fertility treatment with mammographic density in a large screening-based cohort of women: a cross-sectional study , 2016, Breast Cancer Research.

[31]  Y. Kubota,et al.  Volumetric breast density is essential for predicting cosmetic outcome at the late stage after breast-conserving surgery. , 2016, European journal of surgical oncology : the journal of the European Society of Surgical Oncology and the British Association of Surgical Oncology.

[32]  U. Shahi,et al.  Epidemiological Study on Breast Cancer Associated Risk Factors and Screening Practices among Women in the Holy City of Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India. , 2016, Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP.

[33]  B. Têtu,et al.  Association between expression of inflammatory markers in normal breast tissue and mammographic density among premenopausal and postmenopausal women , 2017, Menopause.

[34]  Eun Ju Son,et al.  Automated Volumetric Breast Density Measurements in the Era of the BI-RADS Fifth Edition: A Comparison With Visual Assessment. , 2016, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[35]  L. Habel,et al.  The Effect of California’s Breast Density Notification Legislation on Breast Cancer Screening , 2016, Journal of primary care & community health.