Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems

Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems

Objective: The aim of the study is to compare inter-observer agreement between general radiologists in the classification of mammographic breast density using TABAR’s pattern and BI-RADS classification from two-view Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM). Methods: A data set of 400 mammograms was...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Hassan, Radhiana, Ab Rahman, Jamalludin, Zaini, Izwan Zanni, Abdulateef, Reem Mohammed Saeed
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Faculty of Medicine, International Islamic University Malaysia 2015
Subjects:
R Medicine (General)
Online Access:http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/
http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/
http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/1/39216.pdf
id iium-39216
recordtype eprints
spelling iium-392162018-06-12T03:20:39Z http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/ Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems Hassan, Radhiana Ab Rahman, Jamalludin Zaini, Izwan Zanni Abdulateef, Reem Mohammed Saeed R Medicine (General) Objective: The aim of the study is to compare inter-observer agreement between general radiologists in the classification of mammographic breast density using TABAR’s pattern and BI-RADS classification from two-view Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM). Methods: A data set of 400 mammograms was evaluated by three general radiologists. The radiologists independently reviewed the images and classified the parenchymal pattern according to BI-RADS and TABAR classification systems. Inter-observer agreements were analyzed using kappa statistics. Results: Inter-observer agreement for the BI-RADS is slight to fair (Reviewer 1 versus Reviewer 2: k=0.19, Reviewer 1 versus Reviewer 3, k=0.07 and Reviewer 2 versus Reviewer 3, k=0.49) and for TABAR is fair to moderate (Reviewer 1 versus Reviewer 2: k=0.23, Reviewer 1 versus Reviewer 3, k=0.31 and Reviewer 2 versus Reviewer 3, k=0.50). Conclusion: Our study demonstrates a poor level of agreement in breast parenchymal pattern and density based on both BI-RADS and TABAR classifications. Thus, breast density in risk stratification of breast cancer should be used with caution in our local practice. Faculty of Medicine, International Islamic University Malaysia 2015-12 Article PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/1/39216.pdf Hassan, Radhiana and Ab Rahman, Jamalludin and Zaini, Izwan Zanni and Abdulateef, Reem Mohammed Saeed (2015) Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems. International Medical Journal Malaysia, 14 (supp.1). p. 4. ISSN 1823-4631 http://iiumedic.net/imjm/v1/download/volume_14_supplement/IMJM-Vol-14-Supp-p04-Radhiana-Binti-Hassan.pdf
repository_type Digital Repository
institution_category Local University
institution International Islamic University Malaysia
building IIUM Repository
collection Online Access
language English
topic R Medicine (General)
spellingShingle R Medicine (General)
Hassan, Radhiana
Ab Rahman, Jamalludin
Zaini, Izwan Zanni
Abdulateef, Reem Mohammed Saeed
Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems
description Objective: The aim of the study is to compare inter-observer agreement between general radiologists in the classification of mammographic breast density using TABAR’s pattern and BI-RADS classification from two-view Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM). Methods: A data set of 400 mammograms was evaluated by three general radiologists. The radiologists independently reviewed the images and classified the parenchymal pattern according to BI-RADS and TABAR classification systems. Inter-observer agreements were analyzed using kappa statistics. Results: Inter-observer agreement for the BI-RADS is slight to fair (Reviewer 1 versus Reviewer 2: k=0.19, Reviewer 1 versus Reviewer 3, k=0.07 and Reviewer 2 versus Reviewer 3, k=0.49) and for TABAR is fair to moderate (Reviewer 1 versus Reviewer 2: k=0.23, Reviewer 1 versus Reviewer 3, k=0.31 and Reviewer 2 versus Reviewer 3, k=0.50). Conclusion: Our study demonstrates a poor level of agreement in breast parenchymal pattern and density based on both BI-RADS and TABAR classifications. Thus, breast density in risk stratification of breast cancer should be used with caution in our local practice.
format Article
author Hassan, Radhiana
Ab Rahman, Jamalludin
Zaini, Izwan Zanni
Abdulateef, Reem Mohammed Saeed
author_facet Hassan, Radhiana
Ab Rahman, Jamalludin
Zaini, Izwan Zanni
Abdulateef, Reem Mohammed Saeed
author_sort Hassan, Radhiana
title Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems
title_short Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems
title_full Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems
title_fullStr Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems
title_full_unstemmed Reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and Breast Density on Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM): comparison of the two classification systems
title_sort reproducibility of mammographic parenchymal patterns and breast density on full-field digital mammography (ffdm): comparison of the two classification systems
publisher Faculty of Medicine, International Islamic University Malaysia
publishDate 2015
url http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/
http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/
http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/1/39216.pdf
first_indexed 2023-09-18T20:56:19Z
last_indexed 2023-09-18T20:56:19Z
_version_ 1777410327579721728

Similar Items