Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39450526›Full record

ArticleCancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.)2025

Automated Breast Density Assessment for Full-Field Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis.

Shu Jiang, Debbie L Bennett, Simin Chen, Adetunji T Toriola, Graham A Colditz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer prevention research (Philadelphia, Pa.), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Shu JiangDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.ORCID 0000-0003-1464-4838
Debbie L BennettAlvin J. Siteman Cancer Center, Barnes-Jewish Hospital and Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.ORCID 0000-0003-1898-0361
Simin ChenDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.ORCID 0009-0006-2807-0109
Adetunji T ToriolaDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.ORCID 0000-0003-1079-2606
Graham A ColditzDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.ORCID 0000-0002-7307-0291

Funding

Washington University Center for Cellular ImagingP30CA091842 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI AIMEE S JAMES · 2001 to 2026
$128.0M
Dynamic prediction incorporating time-varying covariates for the onset of breast cancerR37CA256810 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI JIANG, SHU · 2021 to 2025
$2.4M
Metabolite Profiles and Mammographic Density in Premenopausal WomenR01CA246592 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI TORIOLA, ADETUNJI T · 2020 to 2024
$1.8M
National Cancer Institute (NCI) P30CA091842National Cancer Institute (NCI) R01CA246592National Cancer Institute (NCI) R37CA256810NCI NIH HHS P30 CA091842NCI NIH HHS R01 CA246592NCI NIH HHS R37 CA256810
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mammographic density is a strong risk factor for breast cancer and is reported clinically as part of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) results issued by radiologists. Automated assessment of density is needed that can be used for both full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) as both types of exams are acquired in standard clinical practice. We trained a deep learning model to automate the estimation of BI-RADS density from a prospective Washington University clinic-based cohort of 9,714 women, entering into the cohort in 2013 with follow-up through October 31, 2020. The cohort included 27% non-Hispanic Black women. The trained algorithm was assessed in an external validation cohort that included 18,360 women screened at Emory from January 1, 2013, and followed up through December 31, 2020, that included 42% non-Hispanic Black women. Our model-estimated BI-RADS density demonstrated substantial agreement with the density as assessed by radiologists. In the external validation, the agreement with radiologists for category B 81% and C 77% for FFDM and B 83% and C 74% for DBT shows important distinction for separation of women with dense breast. We obtained a Cohen's κ of 0.72 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.73) in FFDM and 0.71 (95% confidence interval, 0.69-0.73) in DBT. We provided a consistent and fully automated BI-RADS estimation for both FFDM and DBT using a deep learning model. The software can be easily implemented anywhere for clinical use and risk prediction. Prevention Relevance: The proposed model can reduce interobserver variability in BI-RADS density assessment, thereby providing more standard and consistent density assessment for use in decisions about supplemental screening and risk assessment.

Indexed as

Breast DensityBreast NeoplasmsDeep LearningMammographyAdultAgedAlgorithmsBreastEarly Detection of CancerFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMammary Glands, HumanMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

PMID39450526
PMCPMC11701431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.