Skip to main content

Improving the validity of breast density assessment

Introduction

As the importance of mammographic density in risk stratification and breast cancer research continues to grow, density assessment must be rigorous. Area-based human visual density assessment will continue until software is fully validated. Locally, having reviewed the literature, we chose two tools and sought to establish that these would give meaningful results in our hands for comparison with other data.

Methods

In 50 mammograms, four observers each estimated the percentage dense area, recorded on a 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS). On a separate occasion, each observer also assigned BIRADS density scores. The process was repeated with a minimum interval of 1 week. Observers were blinded to each others' scores and their own previous scores. Viewing parameters were standardised.

Results

BIRADS

Intra-rater agreement: Observers 1, 2 and 4, intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and lower 95% confidence bound all above 0.8 (excellent agreement); below 0.8 for Observer 3. Inter-rater: Observers 2 and 4, ICC = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.95 to 0.98; Observers 1 and 3 with any other, ICC below 0.8.

Percentage

Intra-rater agreement, ICC for all observers >0.9 with lower confidence bound >0.8. Inter-rater: Observers 2 and 4 and 2 and 3, ICC and lower confidence bound >0.8; all other pairs, <0.8.

Conclusion

Intra-observer and inter-observer agreement in mammo-graphic density assessment varies. Percentage dense area estimation using a VAS appears more reproducible than the BIRADS classification. This simple study enabled selection of the most reliable observers and we recommend that other centres undertaking scientific studies where mammographic density is a relevant variable perform similar audits to maximise outcome measure validity.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A Eadie.

Rights and permissions

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/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Eadie, A., Whelehan, P., Baker, L. et al. Improving the validity of breast density assessment. Breast Cancer Res 13, P24 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2976

Download citation

Keywords

  • Visual Analogue Scale
  • Intraclass Correlation Coefficient
  • Mammographic Density
  • Breast Density
  • Lower Confidence