乳腺影像报告和数据系统(BI-RADS)中乳腺钼靶密度的错误分类及其对乳腺密度报告立法的影响

Misclassification of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Mammographic Density and Implications for Breast Density Reporting Legislation.

作者信息

Gard Charlotte C, Aiello Bowles Erin J, Miglioretti Diana L, Taplin Stephen H, Rutter Carolyn M

机构信息

Department of Economics, Applied Statistics, and International Business, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico.

Group Health Research Institute, Group Health Cooperative, Seattle, Washington.

出版信息

Breast J. 2015 Sep-Oct;21(5):481-9. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12443. Epub 2015 Jul 1.

Abstract

USA states have begun legislating mammographic breast density reporting to women, requiring that women undergoing screening mammography who have dense breast tissue (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System [BI-RADS] density c or d) receive written notification of their breast density; however, the impact that misclassification of breast density will have on this reporting remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess reproducibility of the four-category BI-RADS density measure and examine its relationship with a continuous measure of percent density. We enrolled 19 radiologists, experienced in breast imaging, from a single integrated health care system. Radiologists interpreted 341 screening mammograms at two points in time 6 months apart. We assessed intra- and interobserver agreement in radiologists'; interpretations of BI-RADS density and explored whether agreement depended upon radiologist characteristics. We examined the relationship between BI-RADS density and percent density in a subset of 282 examinations. Intraradiologist agreement was moderate to substantial, with kappa varying across radiologists from 0.50 to 0.81 (mean = 0.69, 95% CI [0.63, 0.73]). Intraradiologist agreement was higher for radiologists with ≥10 years experience interpreting mammograms (difference in mean kappa = 0.10, 95% CI [0.01, 0.24]). Interradiologist agreement varied widely across radiologist pairs from slight to substantial, with kappa ranging from 0.02 to 0.72 (mean = 0.46, 95% CI [0.36, 0.55]). Of 145 examinations interpreted as "nondense" (BI-RADS density a or b) by the majority of radiologists, 82.8% were interpreted as "dense" (BI-RADS density c or d) by at least one radiologist. Of 187 examinations interpreted as "dense" by the majority of radiologists, 47.1% were interpreted as "nondense" by at least one radiologist. While the examinations of almost half of the women in our study were interpreted clinically as having BI-RADS density c or d, only about 10% of examinations had percent density >50%. Our results suggest that breast density reporting based on a single BI-RADS density interpretation may be misleading due to high interradiologist variability and a lack of correspondence between BI-RADS density and percent density.

摘要

美国各州已开始立法要求向女性报告乳腺钼靶检查中的乳房密度情况,规定接受乳腺钼靶筛查且乳房组织致密(乳腺影像报告和数据系统[BI-RADS]密度为c或d)的女性应收到关于其乳房密度的书面通知;然而,乳房密度误分类对该报告的影响仍不明确。本研究的目的是评估四类BI-RADS密度测量的可重复性,并检验其与密度百分比连续测量值之间的关系。我们从一个单一的综合医疗保健系统中招募了19名有乳腺影像经验的放射科医生。放射科医生在相隔6个月的两个时间点解读了341份乳腺钼靶筛查图像。我们评估了放射科医生对BI-RADS密度解读的观察者内和观察者间一致性,并探讨一致性是否取决于放射科医生的特征。我们在282份检查的子集中研究了BI-RADS密度与密度百分比之间的关系。放射科医生内部的一致性从中度到高度,不同放射科医生的kappa值在0.50至0.81之间变化(平均值 = 0.69,95%可信区间[0.63, 0.73])。对于有≥10年乳腺钼靶解读经验的放射科医生,其内部一致性更高(平均kappa值差异 = 0.10,95%可信区间[0.01, 0.24])。不同放射科医生对之间的观察者间一致性差异很大,从轻微到高度,kappa值范围为0.02至0.72(平均值 = 0.46,95%可信区间[0.36, 0.55])。在大多数放射科医生解读为“非致密”(BI-RADS密度a或b)的145份检查中,至少有一名放射科医生将82.8%解读为“致密”(BI-RADS密度c或d)。在大多数放射科医生解读为“致密”的187份检查中,至少有一名放射科医生将47.1%解读为“非致密”。虽然我们研究中近一半女性的检查在临床上被解读为BI-RADS密度c或d,但只有约10%的检查密度百分比>50%。我们的结果表明,由于放射科医生间的高变异性以及BI-RADS密度与密度百分比之间缺乏对应关系,基于单一BI-RADS密度解读的乳房密度报告可能会产生误导。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索