E-ISSN 2367-699X | ISSN 2367-7414
 

Original Research 


BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov.

Abstract
Traditionally, mammographic density (MD) of the breast has been assessed by a radiologist visually. This subjective evaluation requires significant experience to distinguish the relative proportions of the fibrous connective tissue and adipose tissue in the mammary gland correctly.
The aim of this study is to compare the capabilities of the different methods (visual and computer-assisted) for assessing mammographic density.
Our sample in this study consists of 66 patients with digital mammography. The mammographic density has been evaluated using the four-grade scale of the American College of Radiology (ACR); visually, visually using an analog scale and semi-automated using UTHSCSA Image Tool 3.0, Image J and Adobe Photoshop CS6 software.
The average mammographic density calculated using the different methods is as follows: 34.8% (from 10% to 70%); 32.1% (from 10% to 60%); 23% (from 0% to 70.9%); 22.7% (from 2.5% to 78.1%) and 22.5% (from 1.5% to 72.4%).
There is a strong correlation between the results obtained visually and those calculated using a computer-assisted measurement (p< 0.0001). A strong correlation was found also between the results acquired using the different semi-automated programs (p< 0.0001).
Precise measurement of mammographic density is of great importance for the mammographic screening and evaluation of breast cancer risk. The semi-automated methods, used for this purpose are objective, accessible and reproducible tools and have some advantages over the subjective visual assessment.

Key words: imagej breast density, early signs of breast cancer, breast density photoshop, breast density measurement, breast density classification


 
ARTICLE TOOLS
Abstract
PDF Fulltext
How to cite this articleHow to cite this article
Citation Tools
Related Records
 Articles by George Baitchev
Articles by Ivan Ivanov
Articles by Ivan Inkov
Articles by Emilia Zlateva
Articles by Zdravko Kamenov
Articles by George Dimitrov
on Google
on Google Scholar


REFERENCES
1. Vacek PM, Geller BM. A prospective study of breast cancer risk using routine mammographic breast density measurements.Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2004;13, 5: 715-22 [Pubmed]   
2. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:227-236 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]   
3. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Rommens JM, et al. Mammographic density: a heritable risk factor for breast cancer. Methods Mol Biol 2009; 472: 343-360 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]   
4. Masarwash A, Auvinen P, Sudah M, et al. Very low mammographic breast density predicts poorer outcome in patients with invasive breast cancer. Eur Radiol. 2015; 25 (7):1875-82 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]   
5. Ghosh K, Brandt KR, Sellers TA, et al. Association of mammographic density with the pathology of subsequent breast cancer among postmenopausal women. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008; 17:872-879 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]    [PMC Free Fulltext]   
6. Wolfe JN. Breast patterns as an index for developing breast cancer. AJR 1976; 126: 1130-1137 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]   
7. D’Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, Berg WA, et al. BI-RADS: mammography, 4th ed. In: D’Orsi CJ, Mendelson EB, Ikeda DM, et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: ACR BI-RADS—breast imaging atlas. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003
8. Li J, Szekely L, Eriksson L, Heddson B, et al. High-throughput mammographic-density measurement: a tool for risk prediction of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2012; 14(4) R114 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]    [PMC Free Fulltext]   
9. Morrish OW, Tucker L, Black R, et al. Mammographic breast density: comparison of methods for quantitative evaluation. Radiology 2015, 275, 2 : 356-65 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]   
10. http://photography.tutsplus.com/tutorials/understanding-using-ansel-adams-zone-system--photo-5607
11. http://compdent.uthscsa.edu/dig/itdesc.html
12. Rasband, W.S., ImageJ, U. S. National Institutes of Health,
13. http://www.strath.ac.uk/are/materials/4dataanalysis-ineducationalresearch/unit4/correlationsdirectionandstrength
14. Heine JJ, Fowler EE, Flowers CI. Full field digital mammography and breast density: comparison of calibrated and noncalibrated measurements. Acad Radiol 2011,18,11: 1430-6 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]    [PMC Free Fulltext]   
15. Eng A., Gallant Z., Shepherd J. end al. Digital Mammographic density and breast cancer risk: a case-control study Of six alternative density assessment methods. Breast Cancer Research 2014, 16:439 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]    [PMC Free Fulltext]   
16. Kerlikowske K, Zhu W, Tosteson AN, et al. Identifying women with dense breasts at high risk for interval cancer: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med 2015; 162, 10: 673-81 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]   
17. Baitchev G, Inkov I, Kyuchukov N, Zlateva E. Breast cancer risk evaluation - a correlation between mammographic density and Gail model. IJSM 2015, 1,1: 18-21 [DOI via Crossref]   
18. Yaffe MJ.Measurement of mammographic density. Breast Cancer Research 2008, 10, (3):209 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]    [PMC Free Fulltext]   
19. Lee JH, Sohn YM, Han KH. Comparison of mammographic density estimation by Volpara software with radiologists' visual assessment: analysis of clinical-radiologic factors affecting discrepancy between them. Acta Radiol 2015,56(9):1061-8 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]   
20. Ekpo EU, McEntee MF. Measurement of breast density with digital breast tomosynthesis--a systematic review. Br J Radiol 2014 ;87 (1043):20140460 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]    [PMC Free Fulltext]   
21. Alonzo- Proulx O, Mawdsley GE, Patrie GT, et al. Reliability of Automated breast density measurements. Radiology 2015 ;275(2):366-76 [DOI via Crossref]    [Pubmed]   

How to Cite this Article
Pubmed Style

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov. BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE. Int J Surg Med. 2015; 1(2): 48-52. doi:10.5455/ijsm.20150903063859


Web Style

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov. BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE. http://www.ejos.org/?mno=198663 [Access: September 19, 2020]. doi:10.5455/ijsm.20150903063859


AMA (American Medical Association) Style

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov. BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE. Int J Surg Med. 2015; 1(2): 48-52. doi:10.5455/ijsm.20150903063859



Vancouver/ICMJE Style

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov. BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE. Int J Surg Med. (2015), [cited September 19, 2020]; 1(2): 48-52. doi:10.5455/ijsm.20150903063859



Harvard Style

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov (2015) BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE. Int J Surg Med, 1 (2), 48-52. doi:10.5455/ijsm.20150903063859



Turabian Style

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov. 2015. BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE. International Journal of Surgery and Medicine, 1 (2), 48-52. doi:10.5455/ijsm.20150903063859



Chicago Style

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov. "BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE." International Journal of Surgery and Medicine 1 (2015), 48-52. doi:10.5455/ijsm.20150903063859



MLA (The Modern Language Association) Style

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov. "BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE." International Journal of Surgery and Medicine 1.2 (2015), 48-52. Print. doi:10.5455/ijsm.20150903063859



APA (American Psychological Association) Style

George Baitchev, Ivan Ivanov, Ivan Inkov, Emilia Zlateva, Zdravko Kamenov, George Dimitrov (2015) BREAST DENSITY EVALUATION: A COMPARISON BETWEEN ASSESSMENT BY A RADIOLOGIST AND THE COMPUTER-ASSISTED THRESHOLD TECHNIQUE. International Journal of Surgery and Medicine, 1 (2), 48-52. doi:10.5455/ijsm.20150903063859