ArticleBreast cancer research : BCR2018
Predicting interval and screen-detected breast cancers from mammographic density defined by different brightness thresholds.
Article in Breast cancer research : BCR, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- AutoCumulus: an automated mammographic density measure created using artificial intelligence.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Breast and bowel cancers diagnosed in people 'too young to have cancer': A blueprint for research using family and twin studies.Genetic epidemiology · 2024Article
- Association of breast cancer with quantitative mammographic density measures for women receiving contrast-enhanced mammography.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2024Article
- Causal relationships between breast cancer risk factors based on mammographic features.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2023Article
- Variance of age-specific log incidence decomposition (VALID): a unifying model of measured and unmeasured genetic and non-genetic risks.International journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- Severity and risk factors of interval breast cancer in Queensland, Australia: a population-based study.Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan) · 2023Article
- Association of contralateral breast cancer risk with mammographic density defined at higher-than-conventional intensity thresholds.International journal of cancer · 2022Article
- Article
- Deep learning identification of stiffness markers in breast cancer.Biomaterials · 2022Article
- Joanne Knight Breast Health Cohort at Siteman Cancer Center.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2022Article
- Article
- Mammographic texture features associated with contralateral breast cancer in the WECARE Study.NPJ breast cancer · 2021Article
- RE: Chemopreventive Agents to Reduce Mammographic Breast Density in Premenopausal Women: A Systematic Review of Clinical Trials.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2021Article
- Personalized early detection and prevention of breast cancer: ENVISION consensus statement.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2020Review
- Interval breast cancer risk associations with breast density, family history and breast tissue aging.International journal of cancer · 2020Article
- Going Beyond Conventional Mammographic Density to Discover Novel Mammogram-Based Predictors of Breast Cancer Risk.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- A review of the influence of mammographic density on breast cancer clinical and pathological phenotype.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCase-control studies show that mammographic density is a better risk factor when defined at higher than conventional pixel-brightness thresholds. We asked if this applied to interval and/or screen-detected cancers.
methodWe conducted a nested case-control study within the prospective Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study including 168 women with interval and 422 with screen-detected breast cancers, and 498 and 1197 matched controls, respectively. We measured absolute and percent mammographic density using the Cumulus software at the conventional threshold (Cumulus) and two increasingly higher thresholds (Altocumulus and Cirrocumulus, respectively). Measures were transformed and adjusted for age and body mass index (BMI). Using conditional logistic regression and adjusting for BMI by age at mammogram, we estimated risk discrimination by the odds ratio per adjusted standard deviation (OPERA), calculated the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared nested models using the likelihood ratio criterion and models with the same number of parameters using the difference in Bayesian information criterion (ΔBIC).
resultsFor interval cancer, there was very strong evidence that the association was best predicted by Cumulus as a percentage (OPERA = 2.33 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.85-2.92); all ΔBIC > 14), and the association with BMI was independent of age at mammogram. After adjusting for percent Cumulus, no other measure was associated with risk (all P > 0.1). For screen-detected cancer, however, the associations were strongest for the absolute and percent Cirrocumulus measures (all ΔBIC > 6), and after adjusting for Cirrocumulus, no other measure was associated with risk (all P > 0.07).
conclusionThe amount of brighter areas is the best mammogram-based measure of screen-detected breast cancer risk, while the percentage of the breast covered by white or bright areas is the best mammogram-based measure of interval breast cancer risk, irrespective of BMI. Therefore, there are different features of mammographic images that give clinically important information about different outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.