ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2016
Mammographic density assessed on paired raw and processed digital images and on paired screen-film and digital images across three mammography systems.
Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph
Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 12% of its field
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mammographic density and ageing: A collaborative pooled analysis of cross-sectional data from 22 countries worldwide.PLoS medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Mammographic density and breast cancer risk among Black American women.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Permutation Test for Image-on-Scalar Regression With an Application to Breast Cancer.Statistics in medicine · 2024Article
- Association and Prediction Utilizing Craniocaudal and Mediolateral Oblique View Digital Mammography and Long-Term Breast Cancer Risk.Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.) · 2023Article
- The association of age at menarche and adult height with mammographic density in the International Consortium of Mammographic Density.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2022Article
- Deep learning identification of stiffness markers in breast cancer.Biomaterials · 2022Article
- Mammographic texture features associated with contralateral breast cancer in the WECARE Study.NPJ breast cancer · 2021Article
- A Deep Learning Approach to Re-create Raw Full-Field Digital Mammograms for Breast Density and Texture Analysis.Radiology. Artificial intelligence · 2021Article
- The distribution and determinants of mammographic density measures in Western Australian aboriginal women.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2019Article
- A comprehensive tool for measuring mammographic density changes over time.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2018Article
- Automated mammographic breast density estimation using a fully convolutional network.Medical physics · 2018Article
- Percent mammographic density prediction: development of a model in the nurses' health studies.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2017Article
- Qualitative Versus Quantitative Mammographic Breast Density Assessment: Applications for the US and Abroad.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017Review
- Visualization of Breast Microcalcifications on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and 2-Dimensional Digital Mammography Using Specimens.Breast cancer : basic and clinical research · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
58 authors at 20 institutions in 21 countries.
Anya BurtonSection of Environment and Radiation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 cours Albert Thomas, 69372, Lyon, Cedex 09, France. burtona@fellows.iarc.fr.ORCID 0000-0001-7397-3442
Graham ByrnesSection of Environment and Radiation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 cours Albert Thomas, 69372, Lyon, Cedex 09, France.
Jennifer StoneCentre for Genetic Origins of Health and Disease, Curtin University and the University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Rulla M TamimiChanning Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
John HeineMoffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA.
Celine VachonDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Vahit OzmenDepartment of Surgery, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ana PereiraInstitute of Nutrition and Food Technology, University of Chile, Santiago, Chile.
Maria Luisa GarmendiaCentre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, London, UK.
Christopher ScottDepartment of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
John H HipwellCentre for Medical Image Computing, University College London, London, UK.
Caroline DickensFaculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Joachim SchüzSection of Environment and Radiation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 cours Albert Thomas, 69372, Lyon, Cedex 09, France.
Mustafa Erkin AribalMarmara University School of Medicine Department of Radiology, Istanbul, Turkey.
Kimberly BertrandSlone Epidemiology Center, Boston University, Boston, MA, USA.
Ava KwongDivision of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China.
Graham G GilesCancer Epidemiology Centre, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
John HopperCentre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Beatriz Pérez GómezCancer Epidemiology Unit, Instituto de Salud Carlos III and CIBERESP, Madrid, Spain.
Marina PollánCancer Epidemiology Unit, Instituto de Salud Carlos III and CIBERESP, Madrid, Spain.
Soo-Hwang TeoBreast Cancer Research Group, University Malaya Medical Centre, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Shivaani MariapunCancer Research Malaysia, Subang Jaya, Malaysia.
Nur Aishah Mohd TaibBreast Cancer Research Group, University Malaya Medical Centre, University Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
Martín LajousDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Ruy Lopez-RiduaraCenter for Research on Population Health, Instituto Nacional de Salud Pública, Mexico City, Mexico.
Megan RiceChanning Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Isabelle RomieuSection of Nutrition and Metabolism, International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France.
Anath Arzee FlugelmanNational Cancer Control Center, Haifa, Israel.
Giske UrsinCancer Registry of Norway, Oslo, Norway.
Samera QureshiNorwegian Center for Minority and Migrant Health Research (NAKMI), Oslo, Norway.
Huiyan MaDepartment of Population Sciences, Beckman Research Institute, City of Hope, CA, USA.
Eunjung LeeDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Reza SirousIsfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Mehri SirousIsfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran.
Jong Won LeeDepartment of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Jisun KimDepartment of Surgery, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Dorria SalemCairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Rasha KamalWoman Imaging Unit, Radiodiagnosis Department, Kasr El Aini, Cairo University Hospitals, Cairo, Egypt.
Mikael HartmanDepartment of Surgery, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, Singapore, Singapore.
Hui MiaoSaw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Kee-Seng ChiaNUS Graduate School for Integrative Sciences and Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore.
Chisato NagataGifu University, Gifu, Japan.
Sudhir VinayakAga Khan University Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya.
Rose NdumiaAga Khan University Hospital, Nairobi, Kenya.
Carla H van GilsJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Johanna O P WandersJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Beata PeplonskaNofer Institute of Occupational Medicine, Łódz, Poland.
Agnieszka BukowskaNofer Institute of Occupational Medicine, Łódz, Poland.
Steve AllenDepartment of Imaging, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
Sarah VinnicombeDivision of Cancer Research, Ninewells Hospital & Medical School, Dundee, UK.
Sue MossWolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Anna M ChiarelliOntario Breast Screening Program, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, Canada.
Linda LintonPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Gertraud MaskarinecUniversity of Hawaii Cancer Center, Honolulu, HI, USA.
Martin J YaffeMedical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Norman F BoydPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, Canada.
Isabel Dos-Santos-SilvaDepartment of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Valerie A McCormackSection of Environment and Radiation, International Agency for Research on Cancer, 150 cours Albert Thomas, 69372, Lyon, Cedex 09, France.
Centre international de recherche sur le cancer · FRNational University of Singapore · SGAga Khan University Hospital Nairobi · KEAsan Medical Center · KRBrigham and Women's Hospital · USInstituto de Salud Carlos III · ESInstituto Nacional de Salud Pública · MXIsfahan University of Medical Sciences · IRMayo Clinic in Florida · USNofer Institute of Occupational Medicine · PLPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre · CAThe University of Melbourne · AUUniversity College London · GBUniversity Malaya Medical Centre · MYUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLUniversity of Southern California · USBoston University · USCairo University · EGCairo University hospitals · EGCancer Care Ontario · CA
Funding
Statistical MethodsP01CA087969 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI ELIASSEN, A. HEATHER, TAMIMI, RULLA M · 2000 to 2019
$77.8MThe Role of CHFR in Tumorigenesis and Paclitaxel-Sensitivity in Breast CancerP50CA116201 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI PETER C LUCAS · 2005 to 2026
$49.9MLong Term Multidisciplinary Study of Cancer in Women: The Nurses Health StudyUM1CA186107 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI ELIASSEN, A. HEATHER, STAMPFER, MEIR · 2014 to 2023
$22.3MLife Course Cancer Epidemiology Cohort in WomenUM1CA176726 · NCI · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI WILLETT, WALTER C. · 2013 to 2017
$15.7MAutomated Density Measures for Estimating Breast Cancer Risk and Therapy ResponseR01CA177150 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI KERLIKOWSKE, KARLA M, VACHON, CELINE M · 2013 to 2017
$3.0MRisk factors for breast cancer molecular subtypesR01CA140286 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI KERLIKOWSKE, KARLA M, VACHON, CELINE M · 2010 to 2014
$2.6MWhole Genome Association Study of Mammographic DensityR01CA131332 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI TAMIMI, RULLA M · 2009 to 2012
$1.9MMolecular Predictors of Mammographic DensityR01CA124865 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI TAMIMI, RULLA M · 2008 to 2011
$1.2MInternational Pooling Project of Mammographic DensityR03CA167771 · NCI · INTERNATIONAL AGENCY FOR RES ON CANCER · PI MCCORMACK, VALERIE · 2012 to 2013
$105kCancer Research UK 14565Cancer Research UK C405/A14565NCI NIH HHS P01 CA087969NCI NIH HHS P50 CA116201NCI NIH HHS R01 CA124865NCI NIH HHS R01 CA131332NCI NIH HHS R01 CA140286NCI NIH HHS R01 CA177150NCI NIH HHS R03 CA167771NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA176726NCI NIH HHS UM1 CA186107World Health Organization 001
Abstract
backgroundInter-women and intra-women comparisons of mammographic density (MD) are needed in research, clinical and screening applications; however, MD measurements are influenced by mammography modality (screen film/digital) and digital image format (raw/processed). We aimed to examine differences in MD assessed on these image types.
methodsWe obtained 1294 pairs of images saved in both raw and processed formats from Hologic and General Electric (GE) direct digital systems and a Fuji computed radiography (CR) system, and 128 screen-film and processed CR-digital pairs from consecutive screening rounds. Four readers performed Cumulus-based MD measurements (n = 3441), with each image pair read by the same reader. Multi-level models of square-root percent MD were fitted, with a random intercept for woman, to estimate processed-raw MD differences.
resultsBreast area did not differ in processed images compared with that in raw images, but the percent MD was higher, due to a larger dense area (median 28.5 and 25.4 cm
conclusionsMD was slightly higher when measured on processed than on raw direct digital mammograms. Comparisons of MD on these image formats should ideally control for this non-constant and reader-specific difference.
Indexed as
Breast DensityImage Processing, Computer-AssistedAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMammographyMiddle AgedBreast cancerBreast densityImage processingMammographic density assessmentMethods
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390
Registered trials
None linked
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.