Cargando…

Validation of a new fully automated software for 2D digital mammographic breast density evaluation in predicting breast cancer risk

We compared accuracy for breast cancer (BC) risk stratification of a new fully automated system (DenSeeMammo—DSM) for breast density (BD) assessment to a non-inferiority threshold based on radiologists’ visual assessment. Pooled analysis was performed on 14,267 2D mammograms collected from women age...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Giorgi Rossi, Paolo, Djuric, Olivera, Hélin, Valerie, Astley, Susan, Mantellini, Paola, Nitrosi, Andrea, Harkness, Elaine F., Gauthier, Emilien, Puliti, Donella, Balleyguier, Corinne, Baron, Camille, Gilbert, Fiona J., Grivegnée, André, Pattacini, Pierpaolo, Michiels, Stefan, Delaloge, Suzette
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8494838/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34615978
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-99433-3
_version_ 1784579402848272384
author Giorgi Rossi, Paolo
Djuric, Olivera
Hélin, Valerie
Astley, Susan
Mantellini, Paola
Nitrosi, Andrea
Harkness, Elaine F.
Gauthier, Emilien
Puliti, Donella
Balleyguier, Corinne
Baron, Camille
Gilbert, Fiona J.
Grivegnée, André
Pattacini, Pierpaolo
Michiels, Stefan
Delaloge, Suzette
author_facet Giorgi Rossi, Paolo
Djuric, Olivera
Hélin, Valerie
Astley, Susan
Mantellini, Paola
Nitrosi, Andrea
Harkness, Elaine F.
Gauthier, Emilien
Puliti, Donella
Balleyguier, Corinne
Baron, Camille
Gilbert, Fiona J.
Grivegnée, André
Pattacini, Pierpaolo
Michiels, Stefan
Delaloge, Suzette
author_sort Giorgi Rossi, Paolo
collection PubMed
description We compared accuracy for breast cancer (BC) risk stratification of a new fully automated system (DenSeeMammo—DSM) for breast density (BD) assessment to a non-inferiority threshold based on radiologists’ visual assessment. Pooled analysis was performed on 14,267 2D mammograms collected from women aged 48–55 years who underwent BC screening within three studies: RETomo, Florence study and PROCAS. BD was expressed through clinical Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification. Women in BI-RADS D category had a 2.6 (95% CI 1.5–4.4) and a 3.6 (95% CI 1.4–9.3) times higher risk of incident and interval cancer, respectively, than women in the two lowest BD categories. The ability of DSM to predict risk of incident cancer was non-inferior to radiologists’ visual assessment as both point estimate and lower bound of 95% CI (AUC 0.589; 95% CI 0.580–0.597) were above the predefined visual assessment threshold (AUC 0.571). AUC for interval (AUC 0.631; 95% CI 0.623–0.639) cancers was even higher. BD assessed with new fully automated method is positively associated with BC risk and is not inferior to radiologists’ visual assessment. It is an even stronger marker of interval cancer, confirming an appreciable masking effect of BD that reduces mammography sensitivity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8494838
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84948382021-10-08 Validation of a new fully automated software for 2D digital mammographic breast density evaluation in predicting breast cancer risk Giorgi Rossi, Paolo Djuric, Olivera Hélin, Valerie Astley, Susan Mantellini, Paola Nitrosi, Andrea Harkness, Elaine F. Gauthier, Emilien Puliti, Donella Balleyguier, Corinne Baron, Camille Gilbert, Fiona J. Grivegnée, André Pattacini, Pierpaolo Michiels, Stefan Delaloge, Suzette Sci Rep Article We compared accuracy for breast cancer (BC) risk stratification of a new fully automated system (DenSeeMammo—DSM) for breast density (BD) assessment to a non-inferiority threshold based on radiologists’ visual assessment. Pooled analysis was performed on 14,267 2D mammograms collected from women aged 48–55 years who underwent BC screening within three studies: RETomo, Florence study and PROCAS. BD was expressed through clinical Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification. Women in BI-RADS D category had a 2.6 (95% CI 1.5–4.4) and a 3.6 (95% CI 1.4–9.3) times higher risk of incident and interval cancer, respectively, than women in the two lowest BD categories. The ability of DSM to predict risk of incident cancer was non-inferior to radiologists’ visual assessment as both point estimate and lower bound of 95% CI (AUC 0.589; 95% CI 0.580–0.597) were above the predefined visual assessment threshold (AUC 0.571). AUC for interval (AUC 0.631; 95% CI 0.623–0.639) cancers was even higher. BD assessed with new fully automated method is positively associated with BC risk and is not inferior to radiologists’ visual assessment. It is an even stronger marker of interval cancer, confirming an appreciable masking effect of BD that reduces mammography sensitivity. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-10-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8494838/ /pubmed/34615978 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-99433-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Article
Giorgi Rossi, Paolo
Djuric, Olivera
Hélin, Valerie
Astley, Susan
Mantellini, Paola
Nitrosi, Andrea
Harkness, Elaine F.
Gauthier, Emilien
Puliti, Donella
Balleyguier, Corinne
Baron, Camille
Gilbert, Fiona J.
Grivegnée, André
Pattacini, Pierpaolo
Michiels, Stefan
Delaloge, Suzette
Validation of a new fully automated software for 2D digital mammographic breast density evaluation in predicting breast cancer risk
title Validation of a new fully automated software for 2D digital mammographic breast density evaluation in predicting breast cancer risk
title_full Validation of a new fully automated software for 2D digital mammographic breast density evaluation in predicting breast cancer risk
title_fullStr Validation of a new fully automated software for 2D digital mammographic breast density evaluation in predicting breast cancer risk
title_full_unstemmed Validation of a new fully automated software for 2D digital mammographic breast density evaluation in predicting breast cancer risk
title_short Validation of a new fully automated software for 2D digital mammographic breast density evaluation in predicting breast cancer risk
title_sort validation of a new fully automated software for 2d digital mammographic breast density evaluation in predicting breast cancer risk
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8494838/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34615978
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-99433-3
work_keys_str_mv AT giorgirossipaolo validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT djuricolivera validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT helinvalerie validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT astleysusan validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT mantellinipaola validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT nitrosiandrea validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT harknesselainef validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT gauthieremilien validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT pulitidonella validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT balleyguiercorinne validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT baroncamille validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT gilbertfionaj validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT grivegneeandre validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT pattacinipierpaolo validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT michielsstefan validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk
AT delalogesuzette validationofanewfullyautomatedsoftwarefor2ddigitalmammographicbreastdensityevaluationinpredictingbreastcancerrisk