A stepwedge-based method for measuring breast density: observer variability and comparison with human reading

Breast density is positively linked to the risk of developing breast cancer. We have developed a semi-automated, stepwedge-based method that has been applied to the mammograms of 1,289 women in the UK breast screening programme to measure breast density by volume and area. 116 images were analysed by three independent operators to assess inter-observer variability; 24 of these were analysed on 10 separate occasions by the same operator to determine intra-observer variability. 168 separate images were analysed using the stepwedge method and by two radiologists who independently estimated percentage breast density by area. There was little intra-observer variability in the stepwedge method (average coefficients of variation 3.49% - 5.73%). There were significant differences in the volumes of glandular tissue obtained by the three operators. This was attributed to variations in the operators' definition of the breast edge. For fatty and dense breasts, there was good correlation between breast density assessed by the stepwedge method and the radiologists. This was also observed between radiologists, despite significant inter-observer variation. Based on analysis of thresholds used in the stepwedge method, radiologists' definition of a dense pixel is one in which the percentage of glandular tissue is between 10 and 20% of the total thickness of tissue.

[1]  Dan Rico,et al.  A volumetric method for estimation of breast density on digitized screen-film mammograms. , 2003, Medical physics.

[2]  Berkman Sahiner,et al.  Computerized image analysis: estimation of breast density on mammograms , 2000, Medical Imaging: Image Processing.

[3]  Susan M. Astley,et al.  Automated Breast Tissue Measurement of Women at Increased Risk of Breast Cancer , 2006, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[4]  Norman Boyd,et al.  Mammographic Density and Breast Cancer Risk: Evaluation of a Novel Method of Measuring Breast Tissue Volumes , 2009, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[5]  N. Boyd,et al.  Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  E. Fishell,et al.  Radio-free America: what to do with the waste. , 1994, Environmental health perspectives.

[7]  N. Boyd,et al.  Automated analysis of mammographic densities. , 1996, Physics in medicine and biology.

[8]  Daniel B Kopans,et al.  Basic physics and doubts about relationship between mammographically determined tissue density and breast cancer risk. , 2008, Radiology.

[9]  Susan M. Astley,et al.  Quantifying Breast Thickness for Density Measurement , 2008, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[10]  N. Boyd,et al.  The quantitative analysis of mammographic densities. , 1994, Physics in medicine and biology.

[11]  George Davey Smith,et al.  Breast composition measurements using retrospective standard mammogram form (SMF) , 2006, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[12]  Susan M. Astley,et al.  A New Step-Wedge for the Volumetric Measurement of Mammographic Density , 2006, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[13]  J M Bland,et al.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement , 1986 .

[14]  J. Wolfe Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer. , 1976, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[15]  J. Kaufhold,et al.  A calibration approach to glandular tissue composition estimation in digital mammography. , 2002, Medical physics.

[16]  Susan M. Astley,et al.  Feasibility and Acceptability of Stepwedge-Based Density Measurement , 2006, Digital Mammography / IWDM.