Mammographic density: Comparison of visual assessment with fully automatic calculation on a multivendor dataset
Authors:
Daniela Sacchetto,
Lia Morra,
Silvano Agliozzo,
Daniela Bernardi,
Tomas Bjorklund,
Beniamino Brancato,
Patrizia Bravetti,
Luca A. Carbonaro,
Loredana Correale,
Carmen Fantò,
Elisabetta Favettini,
Laura Martincich,
Luisella Milanesio,
Sara Mombelloni,
Francesco Monetti,
Doralba Morrone,
Marco Pellegrini,
Barbara Pesce,
Antonella Petrillo,
Gianni Saguatti,
Carmen Stevanin,
Rubina M. Trimboli,
Paola Tuttobene,
Marvi Valentini,
Vincenzo Marra
, et al. (3 additional authors not shown)
Abstract:
Objectives: To compare breast density (BD) assessment provided by an automated BD evaluator (ABDE) with that provided by a panel of experienced breast radiologists, on a multivendor dataset.
Methods: Twenty-one radiologists assessed 613 screening/diagnostic digital mammograms from 9 centers and 6 different vendors, using the BI-RADS a, b, c, and d density classification. The same mammograms were…
▽ More
Objectives: To compare breast density (BD) assessment provided by an automated BD evaluator (ABDE) with that provided by a panel of experienced breast radiologists, on a multivendor dataset.
Methods: Twenty-one radiologists assessed 613 screening/diagnostic digital mammograms from 9 centers and 6 different vendors, using the BI-RADS a, b, c, and d density classification. The same mammograms were also evaluated by an ABDE providing the ratio between fibroglandular and total breast area on a continuous scale and, automatically, the BI-RADS score. Panel majority report (PMR) was used as reference standard. Agreement (k) and accuracy (proportion of cases correctly classified) were calculated for binary (BI-RADS a-b versus c-d) and 4-class classification.
Results: While the agreement of individual radiologists with PMR ranged from k=0.483 to k=0.885, the ABDE correctly classified 563/613 mammograms (92%). A substantial agreement for binary classification was found for individual reader pairs (k=0.620, standard deviation [SD]=0.140), individual versus PMR (k=0.736, SD=0.117), and individual versus ABDE (k=0.674, SD=0.095). Agreement between ABDE and PMR was almost perfect (k=0.831).
Conclusions: The ABDE showed an almost perfect agreement with a 21-radiologist panel in binary BD classification on a multivendor dataset, earning a chance as a reproducible alternative to visual evaluation.
△ Less
Submitted 13 November, 2018;
originally announced November 2018.
