Tuesday, April 23, 2024
Celine M Vachon; Carla H van Gils; Thomas A Sellers; Karthik Ghosh; Sandhya Pruthi; Kathleen R Brandt; V Shane Pankratz
DisclosuresBreast Cancer Res. 2007;9(6)
| Classification | General population | Symptomatic population | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incidence studies | Prevalence studies | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Wolfe parenchymal pattern | 2,664/23,469b | 2,169/32,184b | 1,857/25,394b | ||||
| N1 | 181/3,613 | 1.0 | 557/15,731 | 1.0 | 428/3,318 | 1.0 | |
| P1 | 525/6,682 | 1.8 (1.4, 2.2) | 519/9,684 | 1.3 (1.0, 1.5) | 315/5,031 | 1.0 (0.77, 1.3) | |
| P2 | 1,162/10,433 | 3.1 (2.5, 3.7) | 660/4,369 | 2.0 (1.3, 3.0) | 526/5,128 | 1.5 (0.91, 2.4) | |
| DY | 246/2,309 | 4.0 (2.5, 6.3) | 294/2,216 | 2.4 (2.0, 3.0) | 400/4,976 | 1.7 (1.0, 2.8) | |
| Percentage mammographic density | 4,508/8,342b | 2,219/4,063b | 160/160b | ||||
| <5% | 1,194/1,744c | 1.0 | 643/1,182c | 1.0 | 35/84c | 1.0 | |
| 5%-24% | 1.8 (1.5, 2.2) | 1.4 (1.1, 1.8) | |||||
| 25%-49% | 1,049/1,045 | 2.1 (1.7, 2.6) | 589/835 | 2.2 (1.8, 2.8) | 66/35 | 5.5 (2.8-11) | |
| 50%-74% | 2.9 (2.5, 3.4) | 438/665 | 2.9 (2.3, 3.8) | 34/23 | 4.8 (2.2-11) | ||
| 75%+ | 1,211/999 | 4.6 (3.6, 5.9) | 190/282 | 3.7 (2.7, 5.0) | 25/18 | 4.3 (1.8-10) | |
| BI-RADS | 1,992/104,663b | Vacekand Geller[30] | Ziv et al.[57] | 397/1,589b | |||
| Fatty | 62/7,550 | 1.0 (Ref) | 0.3 (0.2, 0.4) | 20/134 | 1.0 | ||
| Scattered density | 950/52,379 | 2.2 (1.6, 3.0) | 1.0 (Ref) | 216/957 | 1.6 (0.9, 2.8) | ||
| Heterogeneous density | 783/36,564 | 3.0 (2.2, 4.1) | 1.3 (1.1, 1.5) | 117/407 | 2.3 (1.3, 4.3) | ||
| Extremely dense | 197/8,170 | 4.0 (2.8, 5.7) | 20.1 (1.6, 2.8) | 44/91 | 4.5 (1.9, 10.6) | ||
aCases and controls from individual categories may not add to the overall number of cases and controls used in the meta-analysis since categories from individual studies did not always coincide with those presented in the meta-analysis. Only numbers of cases and controls from studies with these categories are presented and used for the calculation of prevalence.
bTotal cases and noncases used in meta-analysis by McCormack and colleagues[3] for each classification and study type.
cWhen possible, categories were combined to provide the maximum contribution of cases and controls from individual studies.
BI-RADS = Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System; CI = confidence interval; Ref = reference; RR = relative risk.
| Description | Qualitative | Quantitative | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wolfe | BI-RADS | Planimeter | Computer-assisted thresholding method | Visual estimation | |
| Visual classification of the mammographic image into four categories based on extent and distribution of the parenchyma, including ducts, nodular, homogeneous densities, and fat. | Standardized reporting of visual assessment of mammographic findings by the American College of Radiology BI-RADS. Both breasts are used for the BI-RADS | An acetate overlay is placed over the mammogram image to outline the breast, and an expert reader traces the areas of breast density. The total breast and dense areas are measured with an outlining tool. | Mammographic films are digitized, and two threshold values are selected. The first separates the breast from background, and the second identifies the edges of the regions representing radiographically dense tissue. The numbers of pixels comprising the total breast area and those for dense area are calculated. Results can be reported as percentage density (the ratio of the dense pixels to total breast area) or absolute area of density (in pixels, square centimeters or square millimeters) | Radiologist or expert reader subjectively assigns a percentage density corresponding to the proportion of breast that is dense. | |
| Categorization | N1 - Completely fatty breastP1 - Mainly fatty breast with prominent ducts, up to 25% densityP2 - Prominent ducts, more than 25% densityDY - No visible ducts, diffuse and extensive nodular density [64]. | Category 1 - Almost entirely fatty (<25% dense)Category 2 - Scattered fibroglandular densities (approximately 25%-50% dense)Category 3 - Heterogeneously dense (approximately 51%-75% dense)Category 4 - Extremely dense (>75% dense) [65]. | Percentage density on a continuous scale (0%-100%).Can be categorized for analyses (such as 0%, 1%-24%, 25%-49%, 50%-74%, 75%) [4]. | Percentage density (0%-100%) or absolute area of density (in pixels, square centimeters or square millimeters) on continuous scale [60]. Both measures can also be categorized.Percentage or absolute density can be categorized. | Visually estimated directly into categories (such as 0%, <10%, 10%-<25%, 25%-<50%, 50%-<75%, >75%) [6]. |
BI-RADS = Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System.
| Classification | General population | Symptomatic population | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incidence studies | Prevalence studies | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Wolfe parenchymal pattern | 2,664/23,469b | 2,169/32,184b | 1,857/25,394b | ||||
| N1 | 181/3,613 | 1.0 | 557/15,731 | 1.0 | 428/3,318 | 1.0 | |
| P1 | 525/6,682 | 1.8 (1.4, 2.2) | 519/9,684 | 1.3 (1.0, 1.5) | 315/5,031 | 1.0 (0.77, 1.3) | |
| P2 | 1,162/10,433 | 3.1 (2.5, 3.7) | 660/4,369 | 2.0 (1.3, 3.0) | 526/5,128 | 1.5 (0.91, 2.4) | |
| DY | 246/2,309 | 4.0 (2.5, 6.3) | 294/2,216 | 2.4 (2.0, 3.0) | 400/4,976 | 1.7 (1.0, 2.8) | |
| Percentage mammographic density | 4,508/8,342b | 2,219/4,063b | 160/160b | ||||
| <5% | 1,194/1,744c | 1.0 | 643/1,182c | 1.0 | 35/84c | 1.0 | |
| 5%-24% | 1.8 (1.5, 2.2) | 1.4 (1.1, 1.8) | |||||
| 25%-49% | 1,049/1,045 | 2.1 (1.7, 2.6) | 589/835 | 2.2 (1.8, 2.8) | 66/35 | 5.5 (2.8-11) | |
| 50%-74% | 2.9 (2.5, 3.4) | 438/665 | 2.9 (2.3, 3.8) | 34/23 | 4.8 (2.2-11) | ||
| 75%+ | 1,211/999 | 4.6 (3.6, 5.9) | 190/282 | 3.7 (2.7, 5.0) | 25/18 | 4.3 (1.8-10) | |
| BI-RADS | 1,992/104,663b | Vacekand Geller[30] | Ziv et al.[57] | 397/1,589b | |||
| Fatty | 62/7,550 | 1.0 (Ref) | 0.3 (0.2, 0.4) | 20/134 | 1.0 | ||
| Scattered density | 950/52,379 | 2.2 (1.6, 3.0) | 1.0 (Ref) | 216/957 | 1.6 (0.9, 2.8) | ||
| Heterogeneous density | 783/36,564 | 3.0 (2.2, 4.1) | 1.3 (1.1, 1.5) | 117/407 | 2.3 (1.3, 4.3) | ||
| Extremely dense | 197/8,170 | 4.0 (2.8, 5.7) | 20.1 (1.6, 2.8) | 44/91 | 4.5 (1.9, 10.6) | ||
aCases and controls from individual categories may not add to the overall number of cases and controls used in the meta-analysis since categories from individual studies did not always coincide with those presented in the meta-analysis. Only numbers of cases and controls from studies with these categories are presented and used for the calculation of prevalence.
bTotal cases and noncases used in meta-analysis by McCormack and colleagues[3] for each classification and study type.
cWhen possible, categories were combined to provide the maximum contribution of cases and controls from individual studies.
BI-RADS = Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System; CI = confidence interval; Ref = reference; RR = relative risk.
| Classification | General population | Symptomatic population | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incidence studies | Prevalence studies | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Wolfe parenchymal pattern | 2,664/23,469b | 2,169/32,184b | 1,857/25,394b | ||||
| N1 | 181/3,613 | 1.0 | 557/15,731 | 1.0 | 428/3,318 | 1.0 | |
| P1 | 525/6,682 | 1.8 (1.4, 2.2) | 519/9,684 | 1.3 (1.0, 1.5) | 315/5,031 | 1.0 (0.77, 1.3) | |
| P2 | 1,162/10,433 | 3.1 (2.5, 3.7) | 660/4,369 | 2.0 (1.3, 3.0) | 526/5,128 | 1.5 (0.91, 2.4) | |
| DY | 246/2,309 | 4.0 (2.5, 6.3) | 294/2,216 | 2.4 (2.0, 3.0) | 400/4,976 | 1.7 (1.0, 2.8) | |
| Percentage mammographic density | 4,508/8,342b | 2,219/4,063b | 160/160b | ||||
| <5% | 1,194/1,744c | 1.0 | 643/1,182c | 1.0 | 35/84c | 1.0 | |
| 5%-24% | 1.8 (1.5, 2.2) | 1.4 (1.1, 1.8) | |||||
| 25%-49% | 1,049/1,045 | 2.1 (1.7, 2.6) | 589/835 | 2.2 (1.8, 2.8) | 66/35 | 5.5 (2.8-11) | |
| 50%-74% | 2.9 (2.5, 3.4) | 438/665 | 2.9 (2.3, 3.8) | 34/23 | 4.8 (2.2-11) | ||
| 75%+ | 1,211/999 | 4.6 (3.6, 5.9) | 190/282 | 3.7 (2.7, 5.0) | 25/18 | 4.3 (1.8-10) | |
| BI-RADS | 1,992/104,663b | Vacekand Geller[30] | Ziv et al.[57] | 397/1,589b | |||
| Fatty | 62/7,550 | 1.0 (Ref) | 0.3 (0.2, 0.4) | 20/134 | 1.0 | ||
| Scattered density | 950/52,379 | 2.2 (1.6, 3.0) | 1.0 (Ref) | 216/957 | 1.6 (0.9, 2.8) | ||
| Heterogeneous density | 783/36,564 | 3.0 (2.2, 4.1) | 1.3 (1.1, 1.5) | 117/407 | 2.3 (1.3, 4.3) | ||
| Extremely dense | 197/8,170 | 4.0 (2.8, 5.7) | 20.1 (1.6, 2.8) | 44/91 | 4.5 (1.9, 10.6) | ||
aCases and controls from individual categories may not add to the overall number of cases and controls used in the meta-analysis since categories from individual studies did not always coincide with those presented in the meta-analysis. Only numbers of cases and controls from studies with these categories are presented and used for the calculation of prevalence.
bTotal cases and noncases used in meta-analysis by McCormack and colleagues[3] for each classification and study type.
cWhen possible, categories were combined to provide the maximum contribution of cases and controls from individual studies.
BI-RADS = Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System; CI = confidence interval; Ref = reference; RR = relative risk.
| Classification | General population | Symptomatic population | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incidence studies | Prevalence studies | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Wolfe parenchymal pattern | 2,664/23,469b | 2,169/32,184b | 1,857/25,394b | ||||
| N1 | 181/3,613 | 1.0 | 557/15,731 | 1.0 | 428/3,318 | 1.0 | |
| P1 | 525/6,682 | 1.8 (1.4, 2.2) | 519/9,684 | 1.3 (1.0, 1.5) | 315/5,031 | 1.0 (0.77, 1.3) | |
| P2 | 1,162/10,433 | 3.1 (2.5, 3.7) | 660/4,369 | 2.0 (1.3, 3.0) | 526/5,128 | 1.5 (0.91, 2.4) | |
| DY | 246/2,309 | 4.0 (2.5, 6.3) | 294/2,216 | 2.4 (2.0, 3.0) | 400/4,976 | 1.7 (1.0, 2.8) | |
| Percentage mammographic density | 4,508/8,342b | 2,219/4,063b | 160/160b | ||||
| <5% | 1,194/1,744c | 1.0 | 643/1,182c | 1.0 | 35/84c | 1.0 | |
| 5%-24% | 1.8 (1.5, 2.2) | 1.4 (1.1, 1.8) | |||||
| 25%-49% | 1,049/1,045 | 2.1 (1.7, 2.6) | 589/835 | 2.2 (1.8, 2.8) | 66/35 | 5.5 (2.8-11) | |
| 50%-74% | 2.9 (2.5, 3.4) | 438/665 | 2.9 (2.3, 3.8) | 34/23 | 4.8 (2.2-11) | ||
| 75%+ | 1,211/999 | 4.6 (3.6, 5.9) | 190/282 | 3.7 (2.7, 5.0) | 25/18 | 4.3 (1.8-10) | |
| BI-RADS | 1,992/104,663b | Vacekand Geller[30] | Ziv et al.[57] | 397/1,589b | |||
| Fatty | 62/7,550 | 1.0 (Ref) | 0.3 (0.2, 0.4) | 20/134 | 1.0 | ||
| Scattered density | 950/52,379 | 2.2 (1.6, 3.0) | 1.0 (Ref) | 216/957 | 1.6 (0.9, 2.8) | ||
| Heterogeneous density | 783/36,564 | 3.0 (2.2, 4.1) | 1.3 (1.1, 1.5) | 117/407 | 2.3 (1.3, 4.3) | ||
| Extremely dense | 197/8,170 | 4.0 (2.8, 5.7) | 20.1 (1.6, 2.8) | 44/91 | 4.5 (1.9, 10.6) | ||
aCases and controls from individual categories may not add to the overall number of cases and controls used in the meta-analysis since categories from individual studies did not always coincide with those presented in the meta-analysis. Only numbers of cases and controls from studies with these categories are presented and used for the calculation of prevalence.
bTotal cases and noncases used in meta-analysis by McCormack and colleagues[3] for each classification and study type.
cWhen possible, categories were combined to provide the maximum contribution of cases and controls from individual studies.
BI-RADS = Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System; CI = confidence interval; Ref = reference; RR = relative risk.
| Classification | General population | Symptomatic population | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incidence studies | Prevalence studies | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Wolfe parenchymal pattern | 2,664/23,469b | 2,169/32,184b | 1,857/25,394b | ||||
| N1 | 181/3,613 | 1.0 | 557/15,731 | 1.0 | 428/3,318 | 1.0 | |
| P1 | 525/6,682 | 1.8 (1.4, 2.2) | 519/9,684 | 1.3 (1.0, 1.5) | 315/5,031 | 1.0 (0.77, 1.3) | |
| P2 | 1,162/10,433 | 3.1 (2.5, 3.7) | 660/4,369 | 2.0 (1.3, 3.0) | 526/5,128 | 1.5 (0.91, 2.4) | |
| DY | 246/2,309 | 4.0 (2.5, 6.3) | 294/2,216 | 2.4 (2.0, 3.0) | 400/4,976 | 1.7 (1.0, 2.8) | |
| Percentage mammographic density | 4,508/8,342b | 2,219/4,063b | 160/160b | ||||
| <5% | 1,194/1,744c | 1.0 | 643/1,182c | 1.0 | 35/84c | 1.0 | |
| 5%-24% | 1.8 (1.5, 2.2) | 1.4 (1.1, 1.8) | |||||
| 25%-49% | 1,049/1,045 | 2.1 (1.7, 2.6) | 589/835 | 2.2 (1.8, 2.8) | 66/35 | 5.5 (2.8-11) | |
| 50%-74% | 2.9 (2.5, 3.4) | 438/665 | 2.9 (2.3, 3.8) | 34/23 | 4.8 (2.2-11) | ||
| 75%+ | 1,211/999 | 4.6 (3.6, 5.9) | 190/282 | 3.7 (2.7, 5.0) | 25/18 | 4.3 (1.8-10) | |
| BI-RADS | 1,992/104,663b | Vacekand Geller[30] | Ziv et al.[57] | 397/1,589b | |||
| Fatty | 62/7,550 | 1.0 (Ref) | 0.3 (0.2, 0.4) | 20/134 | 1.0 | ||
| Scattered density | 950/52,379 | 2.2 (1.6, 3.0) | 1.0 (Ref) | 216/957 | 1.6 (0.9, 2.8) | ||
| Heterogeneous density | 783/36,564 | 3.0 (2.2, 4.1) | 1.3 (1.1, 1.5) | 117/407 | 2.3 (1.3, 4.3) | ||
| Extremely dense | 197/8,170 | 4.0 (2.8, 5.7) | 20.1 (1.6, 2.8) | 44/91 | 4.5 (1.9, 10.6) | ||
aCases and controls from individual categories may not add to the overall number of cases and controls used in the meta-analysis since categories from individual studies did not always coincide with those presented in the meta-analysis. Only numbers of cases and controls from studies with these categories are presented and used for the calculation of prevalence.
bTotal cases and noncases used in meta-analysis by McCormack and colleagues[3] for each classification and study type.
cWhen possible, categories were combined to provide the maximum contribution of cases and controls from individual studies.
BI-RADS = Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System; CI = confidence interval; Ref = reference; RR = relative risk.
| Classification | General population | Symptomatic population | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Incidence studies | Prevalence studies | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | Cases/Non-casesa | RR (95% CI) | ||||
| Wolfe parenchymal pattern | 2,664/23,469b | 2,169/32,184b | 1,857/25,394b | ||||
| N1 | 181/3,613 | 1.0 | 557/15,731 | 1.0 | 428/3,318 | 1.0 | |
| P1 | 525/6,682 | 1.8 (1.4, 2.2) | 519/9,684 | 1.3 (1.0, 1.5) | 315/5,031 | 1.0 (0.77, 1.3) | |
| P2 | 1,162/10,433 | 3.1 (2.5, 3.7) | 660/4,369 | 2.0 (1.3, 3.0) | 526/5,128 | 1.5 (0.91, 2.4) | |
| DY | 246/2,309 | 4.0 (2.5, 6.3) | 294/2,216 | 2.4 (2.0, 3.0) | 400/4,976 | 1.7 (1.0, 2.8) | |
| Percentage mammographic density | 4,508/8,342b | 2,219/4,063b | 160/160b | ||||
| <5% | 1,194/1,744c | 1.0 | 643/1,182c | 1.0 | 35/84c | 1.0 | |
| 5%-24% | 1.8 (1.5, 2.2) | 1.4 (1.1, 1.8) | |||||
| 25%-49% | 1,049/1,045 | 2.1 (1.7, 2.6) | 589/835 | 2.2 (1.8, 2.8) | 66/35 | 5.5 (2.8-11) | |
| 50%-74% | 2.9 (2.5, 3.4) | 438/665 | 2.9 (2.3, 3.8) | 34/23 | 4.8 (2.2-11) | ||
| 75%+ | 1,211/999 | 4.6 (3.6, 5.9) | 190/282 | 3.7 (2.7, 5.0) | 25/18 | 4.3 (1.8-10) | |
| BI-RADS | 1,992/104,663b | Vacekand Geller[30] | Ziv et al.[57] | 397/1,589b | |||
| Fatty | 62/7,550 | 1.0 (Ref) | 0.3 (0.2, 0.4) | 20/134 | 1.0 | ||
| Scattered density | 950/52,379 | 2.2 (1.6, 3.0) | 1.0 (Ref) | 216/957 | 1.6 (0.9, 2.8) | ||
| Heterogeneous density | 783/36,564 | 3.0 (2.2, 4.1) | 1.3 (1.1, 1.5) | 117/407 | 2.3 (1.3, 4.3) | ||
| Extremely dense | 197/8,170 | 4.0 (2.8, 5.7) | 20.1 (1.6, 2.8) | 44/91 | 4.5 (1.9, 10.6) | ||
aCases and controls from individual categories may not add to the overall number of cases and controls used in the meta-analysis since categories from individual studies did not always coincide with those presented in the meta-analysis. Only numbers of cases and controls from studies with these categories are presented and used for the calculation of prevalence.
bTotal cases and noncases used in meta-analysis by McCormack and colleagues[3] for each classification and study type.
cWhen possible, categories were combined to provide the maximum contribution of cases and controls from individual studies.
BI-RADS = Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System; CI = confidence interval; Ref = reference; RR = relative risk.
Celine M Vachon,1
Carla H van Gils,2
Thomas A Sellers,3
Karthik Ghosh,1
Sandhya Pruthi,1
Kathleen R Brandt,1
V Shane Pankratz
1
1Mayo Clinic, 200 First St SW, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
2University Medical Center Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
3H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Drive Tampa, FL 33612, USA
Disclosure: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
You have already selected for My Alerts
Click the topic below to receive emails when new articles are available.
You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive email when new content is published.
Manage Email Alertsprocessing....
Don't Miss the Dx: A 61-Year-Old Man With Left Flank Pain, Fever, Night Sweats, and Malaise
Novel Therapeutics in Clinical Trials for the Treatment of TNBC
Triple Negative Breast Cancer e-Tumor Boards: Case 3: PD-L1 Negative TNBC with Homologous Recombination Deficiency
Treatment of Brain Metastases in Advanced HER2+ Breast Cancer
Clinical Practice Guidelines for Early Breast Cancer (ESMO, 2024)
Expanded Role of CDK4/6 Inhibition in HR+/HER2- Breast Cancer
Advances in High-Risk, Early-Stage HR+/HER2- Breast Cancer
The Art of Multidisciplinary Care in Breast Cancer
0.75 CME / ABIM MOC Credits
Comments