CEBP 09 AM Call for Abstracts w/deadline 2008 Conference on Cancer Prevention - Washington, D.C.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stone, J.
Right arrow Articles by Boyd, N. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stone, J.
Right arrow Articles by Boyd, N. F.
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Vol. 12, 625-630, July 2003
© 2003 American Association for Cancer Research

The Detection of Change in Mammographic Density

J. Stone, A. Gunasekara, L. J. Martin, M. Yaffe, S. Minkin and N. F. Boyd1

Division of Epidemiology and Statistics, Ontario Cancer Institute, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1K9 Canada [J. S., A. G., L. J. M., S. M., N. F. B.] and Imaging Research, Sunnybrook and Women’s College Hospital Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Ontario, M4N 3M5 Canada [A. G., M. Y.]

Mammographic density is associated with risk of breast cancer, and factors that change density may also change risk. There has, however, been little research into how change in serial mammograms is best detected. The purpose of the work described here was to examine the effects of different reading conditions on the detection of change in mammographic features. Mammograms were selected from women who had participated in a randomized controlled trial of screening for breast cancer. We selected two age-matched groups of subjects, one had undergone menopause after entry (n = 202) and another who had not (n = 202). Serial mammograms from these subjects were then measured four times using a computer-assisted method under different conditions: (a) films were randomized; (b) subjects were randomized (i.e., pairs of films from individuals were read one after the other), but the order of films was random and unknown to the reader; (c) subjects were randomized, and the order of films was sequential and known to the reader; and (d) subjects were randomized, and the order of films was random and unknown to the reader, but both films in each pair were read simultaneously on separate computer screens. The mean effect of the menopause on change in the mammographic measures of total, dense and nondense areas, percent density, and the associated variances were then compared. With one exception, all of the randomization and viewing methods confirmed a change in all mammographic measures at menopause and produced very similar overall results, suggesting that mammographic density is a robust measure. Compared with randomization of all films, the method in which subjects were randomized and paired films read one after the other in random and unknown order was associated with a slightly smaller mean difference and achieved a substantial reduction in variability, suggesting that it is the most sensitive method of randomization and viewing for the detection of change.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
J. Stone, L. C. Gurrin, G. B. Byrnes, C. J. Schroen, S. A. Treloar, E. J.D. Padilla, G. S. Dite, M. C. Southey, V. M. Hayes, and J. L. Hopper
Mammographic Density and Candidate Gene Variants: A Twins and Sisters Study
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., July 1, 2007; 16(7): 1479 - 1484.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
C. M. Vachon, K. R. Brandt, K. Ghosh, C. G. Scott, S. D. Maloney, M. J. Carston, V. S. Pankratz, and T. A. Sellers
Mammographic Breast Density as a General Marker of Breast Cancer Risk
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., January 1, 2007; 16(1): 43 - 49.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Nutr.Home page
C. J. Fabian and B. F. Kimler
Mammographic Density: Use in Risk Assessment and as a Biomarker in Prevention Trials
J. Nutr., October 1, 2006; 136(10): 2705S - 2708S.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev.Home page
G. Maskarinec, I. Pagano, G. Lurie, and L. N. Kolonel
A longitudinal investigation of mammographic density: the multiethnic cohort.
Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., April 1, 2006; 15(4): 732 - 739.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Nutr.Home page
G. Maskarinec, Y. Takata, A. A. Franke, A. E. Williams, and S. P. Murphy
A 2-Year Soy Intervention in Premenopausal Women Does Not Change Mammographic Densities
J. Nutr., November 1, 2004; 134(11): 3089 - 3094.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 2003 by the American Association for Cancer Research.