Calibrated measures for breast density estimation.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Breast density is a significant breast cancer risk factor measured from mammograms. Evidence suggests that the spatial variation in mammograms may also be associated with risk. We investigated the variation in calibrated mammograms as a breast cancer risk factor and explored its relationship with other measures of breast density using full field digital mammography (FFDM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A matched case-control analysis was used to assess a spatial variation breast density measure in calibrated FFDM images, normalized for the image acquisition technique variation. Three measures of breast density were compared between cases and controls: (a) the calibrated average measure, (b) the calibrated variation measure, and (c) the standard percentage of breast density (PD) measure derived from operator-assisted labeling. Linear correlation and statistical relationships between these three breast density measures were also investigated.

RESULTS

Risk estimates associated with the lowest to highest quartiles for the calibrated variation measure were greater in magnitude (odds ratios: 1.0 [ref.], 3.5, 6.3, and 11.3) than the corresponding risk estimates for quartiles of the standard PD measure (odds ratios: 1.0 [ref.], 2.3, 5.6, and 6.5) and the calibrated average measure (odds ratios: 1.0 [ref.], 2.4, 2.3, and 4.4). The three breast density measures were highly correlated, showed an inverse relationship with breast area, and related by a mixed distribution relationship.

CONCLUSION

The three measures of breast density capture different attributes of the same data field. These preliminary findings indicate the variation measure is a viable automated method for assessing breast density. Insights gained by this work may be used to develop a standard for measuring breast density.