File Download
Links for fulltext
(May Require Subscription)
- Publisher Website: 10.1186/s13058-016-0787-0
- Scopus: eid_2-s2.0-85006762123
- WOS: WOS:000391503900002
- Find via
Supplementary
- Citations:
- Appears in Collections:
Article: Mammographic Density Assessed On Paired Raw And Processed Digital Images And On Paired Screen-film And Digital Images Across Three Mammography Systems
Title | Mammographic Density Assessed On Paired Raw And Processed Digital Images And On Paired Screen-film And Digital Images Across Three Mammography Systems |
---|---|
Authors | Burton, AByrnes, GStone, JTamimi, RMHeine, JVachon, COzmen, VPereira, AGarmendia, MLScott, CHipwell, JHDickens, CSchüz, JAribal, MEBertrand, KKwong, AGiles, GGHopper, JPérez Gómez, BPollán, MTeo, SHMariapun, STaib, NAMLajous, MLopez-Riduara, RRice, MRomieu, IFlugelman, AZUrsin, GQureshi, SMa, HLee, ESirous, RSirous, MLee, JWKim, JSalem, DKamal, RHartman, MMiao, HChia, KSNagata, CVinayak, SNdumia, Rvan Gils, CHWanders, JOPPeplonska, BBukowska, AAllen, SVinnicombe, SMoss, SChiarelli, AMLinton, LMaskarinec, GYaffe, MJBoyd, NFdos-Santos-Silva, IMcCormack, VA |
Keywords | Breast cancer Breast density Image processing Mammographic density assessment Methods |
Issue Date | 2016 |
Publisher | BioMed Central Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://breast-cancer-research.com/ |
Citation | Breast Cancer Research, 2016, v. 18, p. 130:1-12 How to Cite? |
Abstract | BACKGROUND: Inter-women and intra-women comparisons of mammographic density (MD) are needed in research, clinical and screening applications; however, MD measurements are influenced by mammography modality (screen film/digital) and digital image format (raw/processed). We aimed to examine differences in MD assessed on these image types. METHODS: We obtained 1294 pairs of images saved in both raw and processed formats from Hologic and General Electric (GE) direct digital systems and a Fuji computed radiography (CR) system, and 128 screen-film and processed CR-digital pairs from consecutive screening rounds. Four readers performed Cumulus-based MD measurements (n = 3441), with each image pair read by the same reader. Multi-level models of square-root percent MD were fitted, with a random intercept for woman, to estimate processed-raw MD differences. RESULTS: Breast area did not differ in processed images compared with that in raw images, but the percent MD was higher, due to a larger dense area (median 28.5 and 25.4 cm2 respectively, mean √dense area difference 0.44 cm (95% CI: 0.36, 0.52)). This difference in √dense area was significant for direct digital systems (Hologic 0.50 cm (95% CI: 0.39, 0.61), GE 0.56 cm (95% CI: 0.42, 0.69)) but not for Fuji CR (0.06 cm (95% CI: -0.10, 0.23)). Additionally, within each system, reader-specific differences varied in magnitude and direction (p < 0.001). Conversion equations revealed differences converged to zero with increasing dense area. MD differences between screen-film and processed digital on the subsequent screening round were consistent with expected time-related MD declines. CONCLUSIONS: MD was slightly higher when measured on processed than on raw direct digital mammograms. Comparisons of MD on these image formats should ideally control for this non-constant and reader-specific difference. |
Persistent Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/245311 |
ISSN | 2023 Impact Factor: 6.1 2023 SCImago Journal Rankings: 2.578 |
ISI Accession Number ID |
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Burton, A | - |
dc.contributor.author | Byrnes, G | - |
dc.contributor.author | Stone, J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Tamimi, RM | - |
dc.contributor.author | Heine, J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Vachon, C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Ozmen, V | - |
dc.contributor.author | Pereira, A | - |
dc.contributor.author | Garmendia, ML | - |
dc.contributor.author | Scott, C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Hipwell, JH | - |
dc.contributor.author | Dickens, C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Schüz, J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Aribal, ME | - |
dc.contributor.author | Bertrand, K | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kwong, A | - |
dc.contributor.author | Giles, GG | - |
dc.contributor.author | Hopper, J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Pérez Gómez, B | - |
dc.contributor.author | Pollán, M | - |
dc.contributor.author | Teo, SH | - |
dc.contributor.author | Mariapun, S | - |
dc.contributor.author | Taib, NAM | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lajous, M | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lopez-Riduara, R | - |
dc.contributor.author | Rice, M | - |
dc.contributor.author | Romieu, I | - |
dc.contributor.author | Flugelman, AZ | - |
dc.contributor.author | Ursin, G | - |
dc.contributor.author | Qureshi, S | - |
dc.contributor.author | Ma, H | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, E | - |
dc.contributor.author | Sirous, R | - |
dc.contributor.author | Sirous, M | - |
dc.contributor.author | Lee, JW | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kim, J | - |
dc.contributor.author | Salem, D | - |
dc.contributor.author | Kamal, R | - |
dc.contributor.author | Hartman, M | - |
dc.contributor.author | Miao, H | - |
dc.contributor.author | Chia, KS | - |
dc.contributor.author | Nagata, C | - |
dc.contributor.author | Vinayak, S | - |
dc.contributor.author | Ndumia, R | - |
dc.contributor.author | van Gils, CH | - |
dc.contributor.author | Wanders, JOP | - |
dc.contributor.author | Peplonska, B | - |
dc.contributor.author | Bukowska, A | - |
dc.contributor.author | Allen, S | - |
dc.contributor.author | Vinnicombe, S | - |
dc.contributor.author | Moss, S | - |
dc.contributor.author | Chiarelli, AM | - |
dc.contributor.author | Linton, L | - |
dc.contributor.author | Maskarinec, G | - |
dc.contributor.author | Yaffe, MJ | - |
dc.contributor.author | Boyd, NF | - |
dc.contributor.author | dos-Santos-Silva, I | - |
dc.contributor.author | McCormack, VA | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2017-09-18T02:08:22Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2017-09-18T02:08:22Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2016 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | Breast Cancer Research, 2016, v. 18, p. 130:1-12 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 1465-542X | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10722/245311 | - |
dc.description.abstract | BACKGROUND: Inter-women and intra-women comparisons of mammographic density (MD) are needed in research, clinical and screening applications; however, MD measurements are influenced by mammography modality (screen film/digital) and digital image format (raw/processed). We aimed to examine differences in MD assessed on these image types. METHODS: We obtained 1294 pairs of images saved in both raw and processed formats from Hologic and General Electric (GE) direct digital systems and a Fuji computed radiography (CR) system, and 128 screen-film and processed CR-digital pairs from consecutive screening rounds. Four readers performed Cumulus-based MD measurements (n = 3441), with each image pair read by the same reader. Multi-level models of square-root percent MD were fitted, with a random intercept for woman, to estimate processed-raw MD differences. RESULTS: Breast area did not differ in processed images compared with that in raw images, but the percent MD was higher, due to a larger dense area (median 28.5 and 25.4 cm2 respectively, mean √dense area difference 0.44 cm (95% CI: 0.36, 0.52)). This difference in √dense area was significant for direct digital systems (Hologic 0.50 cm (95% CI: 0.39, 0.61), GE 0.56 cm (95% CI: 0.42, 0.69)) but not for Fuji CR (0.06 cm (95% CI: -0.10, 0.23)). Additionally, within each system, reader-specific differences varied in magnitude and direction (p < 0.001). Conversion equations revealed differences converged to zero with increasing dense area. MD differences between screen-film and processed digital on the subsequent screening round were consistent with expected time-related MD declines. CONCLUSIONS: MD was slightly higher when measured on processed than on raw direct digital mammograms. Comparisons of MD on these image formats should ideally control for this non-constant and reader-specific difference. | - |
dc.language | eng | - |
dc.publisher | BioMed Central Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://breast-cancer-research.com/ | - |
dc.relation.ispartof | Breast Cancer Research | - |
dc.rights | Breast Cancer Research. Copyright © BioMed Central Ltd. | - |
dc.rights | This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. | - |
dc.subject | Breast cancer | - |
dc.subject | Breast density | - |
dc.subject | Image processing | - |
dc.subject | Mammographic density assessment | - |
dc.subject | Methods | - |
dc.title | Mammographic Density Assessed On Paired Raw And Processed Digital Images And On Paired Screen-film And Digital Images Across Three Mammography Systems | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.email | Kwong, A: avakwong@hku.hk | - |
dc.identifier.authority | Kwong, A=rp01734 | - |
dc.description.nature | published_or_final_version | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1186/s13058-016-0787-0 | - |
dc.identifier.scopus | eid_2-s2.0-85006762123 | - |
dc.identifier.hkuros | 275664 | - |
dc.identifier.volume | 18 | - |
dc.identifier.spage | 130:1 | - |
dc.identifier.epage | 12 | - |
dc.identifier.isi | WOS:000391503900002 | - |
dc.publisher.place | United Kingdom | - |
dc.identifier.issnl | 1465-5411 | - |