Skip to main content

Table 2 Hazard ratiosa per SD of breast density assessments and breast cancer risk, by view and machine type

From: Examination of fully automated mammographic density measures using LIBRA and breast cancer risk in a cohort of 21,000 non-Hispanic white women

Ā 

LIBRA (MLOb only)

LIBRA (CCb only)

Cumulus

Hologic DA

1.44 (1.33ā€“1.56)

1.28 (1.19ā€“1.38)

1.47 (1.36ā€“1.58)

GE DA

1.24 (1.06ā€“1.46)

1.22 (1.04ā€“1.43)

1.33 (1.11ā€“1.58)

Combinedc DA

1.36 (1.18ā€“1.57)

1.27 (1.18ā€“1.36)

1.44 (1.33ā€“1.55)

Hologic NDA

0.85 (0.76ā€“0.94)

0.87 (0.78ā€“0.96)

0.80 (0.72ā€“0.89)

GE NDA

0.85 (0.68ā€“1.07)

0.92 (0.74ā€“1.14)

0.87 (0.70ā€“1.09)

Combinedc NDA

0.85 (0.77ā€“0.93)

0.88 (0.80ā€“0.96)

0.81 (0.74ā€“0.89)

Hologic PD

1.52 (1.39ā€“1.67)

1.35 (1.23ā€“1.48)

1.61 (1.47ā€“1.77)

GE PD

1.31 (1.08ā€“1.58)

1.25 (1.04ā€“1.50)

1.39 (1.13ā€“1.70)

Combinedc PD

1.44 (1.26ā€“1.66)

1.33 (1.22ā€“1.44)

1.54 (1.34ā€“1.77)

  1. LIBRA and Cumulus DA and PD were log-transformed, and LIBRA and Cumulus NDA were untransformed
  2. aHazard ratios adjusted for age at FFDM (spline), mammogram year (categorical), BMI (spline), parity, first-degree family history, and HRT use within 5Ā years prior to mammogram date. Cumulus analyses were also adjusted for image batch. HRs are per standard deviation of density based on distribution in full cohort
  3. bAverage of measures on right and left breasts
  4. cMeta-analysis was used to combine Hologic and GE results