Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium

B. L. Sprague, K. Kerlikowske, E. J.A. Bowles, G. H. Rauscher, C. I. Lee, A. N.A. Tosteson, Diana L Miglioretti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Changes to mammography practice, including revised Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification guidelines and implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), may impact clinical breast density assessment. We investigated temporal trends in clinical breast density assessment among 2 990 291 digital mammography (DM) screens and 221 063 DBT screens interpreted by 722 radiologists from 144 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. After age-standardization, 46.3% (95% CI = 44.1% to 48.6%) of DM screens were assessed as dense (heterogeneously/extremely dense) during the BI-RADS 4th edition era (2005-2013), compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) during the 5th edition era (2014-2016) (P = .93 from two-sided generalized score test). Among DBT screens in the BI-RADS 5th edition era, 45.8% (95% CI = 42.0% to 49.7%) were assessed as dense (P = .77 from two-sided generalized score test) compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) dense on DM in BI-RADS 5th edition era. Results were similar when examining all four density categories and age subgroups. Clinicians, researchers, and policymakers may reasonably expect stable density distributions across screened populations despite changes to the BI-RADS guidelines and implementation of DBT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)629-632
Number of pages4
JournalJournal of the National Cancer Institute
Volume111
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2019

Fingerprint

Mammography
Breast Neoplasms
Information Systems
Breast
Guidelines
Breast Density
Research Personnel
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research

Cite this

Sprague, B. L., Kerlikowske, K., Bowles, E. J. A., Rauscher, G. H., Lee, C. I., Tosteson, A. N. A., & Miglioretti, D. L. (2019). Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 111(6), 629-632. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djy210

Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. / Sprague, B. L.; Kerlikowske, K.; Bowles, E. J.A.; Rauscher, G. H.; Lee, C. I.; Tosteson, A. N.A.; Miglioretti, Diana L.

In: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Vol. 111, No. 6, 01.06.2019, p. 629-632.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Sprague BL, Kerlikowske K, Bowles EJA, Rauscher GH, Lee CI, Tosteson ANA et al. Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2019 Jun 1;111(6):629-632. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djy210
Sprague, B. L. ; Kerlikowske, K. ; Bowles, E. J.A. ; Rauscher, G. H. ; Lee, C. I. ; Tosteson, A. N.A. ; Miglioretti, Diana L. / Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. In: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2019 ; Vol. 111, No. 6. pp. 629-632.
@article{f9521d16c4454f2c8ac069fe4b597953,
title = "Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium",
abstract = "Changes to mammography practice, including revised Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification guidelines and implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), may impact clinical breast density assessment. We investigated temporal trends in clinical breast density assessment among 2 990 291 digital mammography (DM) screens and 221 063 DBT screens interpreted by 722 radiologists from 144 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. After age-standardization, 46.3{\%} (95{\%} CI = 44.1{\%} to 48.6{\%}) of DM screens were assessed as dense (heterogeneously/extremely dense) during the BI-RADS 4th edition era (2005-2013), compared to 46.5{\%} (95{\%} CI = 43.8{\%} to 49.1{\%}) during the 5th edition era (2014-2016) (P = .93 from two-sided generalized score test). Among DBT screens in the BI-RADS 5th edition era, 45.8{\%} (95{\%} CI = 42.0{\%} to 49.7{\%}) were assessed as dense (P = .77 from two-sided generalized score test) compared to 46.5{\%} (95{\%} CI = 43.8{\%} to 49.1{\%}) dense on DM in BI-RADS 5th edition era. Results were similar when examining all four density categories and age subgroups. Clinicians, researchers, and policymakers may reasonably expect stable density distributions across screened populations despite changes to the BI-RADS guidelines and implementation of DBT.",
author = "Sprague, {B. L.} and K. Kerlikowske and Bowles, {E. J.A.} and Rauscher, {G. H.} and Lee, {C. I.} and Tosteson, {A. N.A.} and Miglioretti, {Diana L}",
year = "2019",
month = "6",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/jnci/djy210",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "111",
pages = "629--632",
journal = "Journal of the National Cancer Institute",
issn = "0027-8874",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment from the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium

AU - Sprague, B. L.

AU - Kerlikowske, K.

AU - Bowles, E. J.A.

AU - Rauscher, G. H.

AU - Lee, C. I.

AU - Tosteson, A. N.A.

AU - Miglioretti, Diana L

PY - 2019/6/1

Y1 - 2019/6/1

N2 - Changes to mammography practice, including revised Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification guidelines and implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), may impact clinical breast density assessment. We investigated temporal trends in clinical breast density assessment among 2 990 291 digital mammography (DM) screens and 221 063 DBT screens interpreted by 722 radiologists from 144 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. After age-standardization, 46.3% (95% CI = 44.1% to 48.6%) of DM screens were assessed as dense (heterogeneously/extremely dense) during the BI-RADS 4th edition era (2005-2013), compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) during the 5th edition era (2014-2016) (P = .93 from two-sided generalized score test). Among DBT screens in the BI-RADS 5th edition era, 45.8% (95% CI = 42.0% to 49.7%) were assessed as dense (P = .77 from two-sided generalized score test) compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) dense on DM in BI-RADS 5th edition era. Results were similar when examining all four density categories and age subgroups. Clinicians, researchers, and policymakers may reasonably expect stable density distributions across screened populations despite changes to the BI-RADS guidelines and implementation of DBT.

AB - Changes to mammography practice, including revised Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification guidelines and implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), may impact clinical breast density assessment. We investigated temporal trends in clinical breast density assessment among 2 990 291 digital mammography (DM) screens and 221 063 DBT screens interpreted by 722 radiologists from 144 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. After age-standardization, 46.3% (95% CI = 44.1% to 48.6%) of DM screens were assessed as dense (heterogeneously/extremely dense) during the BI-RADS 4th edition era (2005-2013), compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) during the 5th edition era (2014-2016) (P = .93 from two-sided generalized score test). Among DBT screens in the BI-RADS 5th edition era, 45.8% (95% CI = 42.0% to 49.7%) were assessed as dense (P = .77 from two-sided generalized score test) compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) dense on DM in BI-RADS 5th edition era. Results were similar when examining all four density categories and age subgroups. Clinicians, researchers, and policymakers may reasonably expect stable density distributions across screened populations despite changes to the BI-RADS guidelines and implementation of DBT.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85068269298&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85068269298&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/jnci/djy210

DO - 10.1093/jnci/djy210

M3 - Article

C2 - 30624682

AN - SCOPUS:85068269298

VL - 111

SP - 629

EP - 632

JO - Journal of the National Cancer Institute

JF - Journal of the National Cancer Institute

SN - 0027-8874

IS - 6

ER -