Sensitivity of screening mammography by density and texture: a cohort study from a population-based screening program in Denmark

• Published in: Breast cancer research : BCR Vol. 21; no. 1; pp. 111 - 7
• Main Authors: von Euler-Chelpin, My, Lillholm, Martin, Vejborg, Ilse, Nielsen, Mads, Lynge, Elsebeth
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BioMed Central 17.10.2019; BioMed Central Ltd; BMC
• Subjects: Aged; Automation; BI-RADS; Biomedical and Life Sciences; Biomedicine; Breast; Breast cancer; Breast Density; Breast Neoplasms - diagnosis; Cancer; Cancer diagnosis; Cancer Research; Cohort analysis; Cohort Studies; Denmark; Early Detection of Cancer - methods; Female; Health risk assessment; Humans; Legislation; Mammographic density; Mammography; Mammography - methods; Mass Screening - methods; Middle Aged; Oncology; Parenchymal texture marker; Population studies; Population Surveillance - methods; Population-based studies; Reproducibility of Results; Research Article; Sensitivity; Sensitivity and Specificity; Surgical Oncology; Women; Denmark; United States > US; BI-RADS; Mammographic density; Sensitivity; Mammography; Parenchymal texture marker
• ISSN: 1465-542X; 1465-5411; 1465-542X
• DOI: 10.1186/s13058-019-1203-3

Background Screening mammography works better in fatty than in dense breast tissue. Computerized assessment of parenchymal texture is a non-subjective method to obtain a refined description of breast tissue, potentially valuable in addition to breast density scoring for the identification of women in need of supplementary imaging. We studied the sensitivity of screening mammography by a combination of radiologist-assessed Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density score and computer-assessed parenchymal texture marker, mammography texture resemblance (MTR), in a population-based screening program. Methods Breast density was coded according to the fourth edition of the BI-RADS density code, and MTR marker was divided into quartiles from 1 to 4. Screening data were followed up for the identification of screen-detected and interval cancers. We calculated sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CI) by BI-RADS density score, MTR marker, and combination hereof. Results Density and texture were strongly correlated, but the combination led to the identification of subgroups with different sensitivity. Sensitivity was high, about 80%, in women with BI-RADS density score 1 and MTR markers 1 or 2. Sensitivity was low, 67%, in women with BI-RADS density score 2 and MTR marker 4. For women with BI-RADS density scores 3 and 4, the already low sensitivity was further decreased for women with MTR marker 4. Specificity was 97–99% in all subgroups. Conclusion Our study showed that women with low density constituted a heterogenous group. Classifying women for extra imaging based on density only might be a too crude approach. Screening sensitivity was systematically high in women with fatty and homogenous breast tissue.