Although breast density is considered a strong predictor of breast cancer risk, its quantitative assessment is difficult. The aim of this study is to demonstrate that breast density assessment with a fully automated software is feasible and correlates with the semi-automated evaluation and the quantitative BI-RADS standards. A data set of 160 mammograms was evaluated by three blinded radiologists. Intra-observer (reader 1: k=0.71; reader 2: k=0.76; reader 3: k=0.62) and inter-observer (reader 1 vs reader 2: k=0.72; reader 2 vs reader 3: k=0.80; reader 3 vs reader 1: k=0.72) variability for the semi-automated software were good on a four-grade scale (D1/D2/D3/D4) and correlated with BI-RADS evaluation made by other two blinded radiologists (r=0.65, p<0.01). Inter-observer (reader 1 vs reader 2: k=0.85; reader 2 vs reader 3: k=0.91; reader 3 vs reader 1: k=0.85) variability for the semi-automated software was very good on a two-grade scale (D1-D2/D3-D4). The use of the fully automated software eliminated intra- and inter-observer differences, correlated with BI-RADS categories (r=0.62, p<0.01) and can replace the semi-automated one (Bland-Altman statistics). Our study demonstrates that automated estimation of breast density is feasible and eliminates subjectivity. Furthermore both the semi-automated and the fully automated density estimation are more accurate than BI-RADS quantitative evaluation and could also be used in the daily clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tagliafico et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: