Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jul;296(1):24-31.
doi: 10.1148/radiol.2020192509. Epub 2020 May 12.

Evaluation of LIBRA Software for Fully Automated Mammographic Density Assessment in Breast Cancer Risk Prediction

Affiliations

Evaluation of LIBRA Software for Fully Automated Mammographic Density Assessment in Breast Cancer Risk Prediction

Aimilia Gastounioti et al. Radiology. 2020 Jul.

Abstract

Background The associations of density measures from the publicly available Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA) software with breast cancer have primarily focused on estimates from the contralateral breast at the time of diagnosis. Purpose To evaluate LIBRA measures on mammograms obtained before breast cancer diagnosis and compare their performance to established density measures. Materials and Methods For this retrospective case-control study, full-field digital mammograms in for-processing (raw) and for-presentation (processed) formats were obtained (March 2008 to December 2011) in women who developed breast cancer an average of 2 years later and in age-matched control patients. LIBRA measures included absolute dense area and area percent density (PD) from both image formats. For comparison, dense area and PD were assessed by using the research software (Cumulus), and volumetric PD (VPD) and absolute dense volume were estimated with a commercially available software (Volpara). Density measures were compared by using Spearman correlation coefficients (r), and conditional logistic regression (odds ratios [ORs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) was performed to examine the associations of density measures with breast cancer by adjusting for age and body mass index. Results Evaluated were 437 women diagnosed with breast cancer (median age, 62 years ± 17 [standard deviation]) and 1225 matched control patients (median age, 61 years ± 16). LIBRA PD showed strong correlations with Cumulus PD (r = 0.77-0.84) and Volpara VPD (r = 0.85-0.90) (P < .001 for both). For LIBRA, the strongest breast cancer association was observed for PD from processed images (OR, 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.5), although the PD association from raw images was not significantly different (OR, 1.2; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.4; P = .25). Slightly stronger breast cancer associations were seen for Cumulus PD (OR, 1.5; 95% CI: 1.3, 1.8; processed images; P = .01) and Volpara VPD (OR, 1.4; 95% CI: 1.2, 1.7; raw images; P = .004) compared with LIBRA measures. Conclusion Automated density measures provided by the Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment from raw and processed mammograms correlated with established area and volumetric density measures and showed comparable breast cancer associations. © RSNA, 2020 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

None
Graphical abstract
Flowchart shows criteria for case-control selection. FFDM = full-field digital mammography.
Figure 1:
Flowchart shows criteria for case-control selection. FFDM = full-field digital mammography.
Correlations of Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA), Cumulus, and Volpara percent density (PD) measures in control patients. Top row is processed (proc) images; bottom row is raw images. VPD = volumetric PD
Figure 2:
Correlations of Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA), Cumulus, and Volpara percent density (PD) measures in control patients. Top row is processed (proc) images; bottom row is raw images. VPD = volumetric PD.
Examples of full-field digital mammographic images with high (top) and low (bottom) agreement of Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA) percent density (PD) with Cumulus PD on processed images (left side) and with Volpara volumetric PD (VPD) on raw images (right side).
Figure 3:
Examples of full-field digital mammographic images with high (top) and low (bottom) agreement of Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA) percent density (PD) with Cumulus PD on processed images (left side) and with Volpara volumetric PD (VPD) on raw images (right side).
Correlations of Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA) density measures extracted from raw and processed image formats in control patients. The left panel shows percent density (PD) and the right panel shows dense area (DA). Proc = processed.
Figure 4:
Correlations of Laboratory for Individualized Breast Radiodensity Assessment (LIBRA) density measures extracted from raw and processed image formats in control patients. The left panel shows percent density (PD) and the right panel shows dense area (DA). Proc = processed.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Bronskill M, Yaffe MJ, Duric N, Minkin S. Breast tissue composition and susceptibility to breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2010;102(16):1224–1237. - PMC - PubMed
    1. McCormack VA, dos Santos Silva I. Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006;15(6):1159–1169. - PubMed
    1. Brentnall AR, Cuzick J, Buist DSM, Bowles EJA. Long-term accuracy of breast cancer risk assessment combining classic risk factors and breast density. JAMA Oncol 2018;4(9):e180174. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000;92(13):1081–1087. - PubMed
    1. Pisano ED, Gatsonis C, Hendrick E, et al. Diagnostic performance of digital versus film mammography for breast-cancer screening. N Engl J Med 2005;353(17):1773–1783 [Published correction appears in N Engl J Med 2006;355(17):1840.]. - PubMed

Publication types