↓ Skip to main content

Case-control study of mammographic density and breast cancer risk using processed digital mammograms

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Case-control study of mammographic density and breast cancer risk using processed digital mammograms
Published in
Breast Cancer Research, May 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13058-016-0715-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laurel A. Habel, Jafi A. Lipson, Ninah Achacoso, Joseph H. Rothstein, Martin J. Yaffe, Rhea Y. Liang, Luana Acton, Valerie McGuire, Alice S. Whittemore, Daniel L. Rubin, Weiva Sieh

Abstract

Full-field digital mammography (FFDM) has largely replaced film-screen mammography in the US. Breast density assessed from film mammograms is strongly associated with breast cancer risk, but data are limited for processed FFDM images used for clinical care. We conducted a case-control study nested among non-Hispanic white female participants of the Research Program in Genes, Environment and Health of Kaiser Permanente Northern California who were aged 40 to 74 years and had screening mammograms acquired on Hologic FFDM machines. Cases (n = 297) were women with a first invasive breast cancer diagnosed after a screening FFDM. For each case, up to five controls (n = 1149) were selected, matched on age and year of FFDM and image batch number, and who were still under follow-up and without a history of breast cancer at the age of diagnosis of the matched case. Percent density (PD) and dense area (DA) were assessed by a radiological technologist using Cumulus. Conditional logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for breast cancer associated with PD and DA, modeled continuously in standard deviation (SD) increments and categorically in quintiles, after adjusting for body mass index, parity, first-degree family history of breast cancer, breast area, and menopausal hormone use. Median intra-reader reproducibility was high with a Pearson's r of 0.956 (range 0.902 to 0.983) for replicate PD measurements across 23 image batches. The overall mean was 20.02 (SD, 14.61) for PD and 27.63 cm(2) (18.22 cm(2)) for DA. The adjusted ORs for breast cancer associated with each SD increment were 1.70 (95 % confidence interval, 1.41-2.04) for PD, and 1.54 (1.34-1.77) for DA. The adjusted ORs for each quintile were: 1.00 (ref.), 1.49 (0.91-2.45), 2.57 (1.54-4.30), 3.22 (1.91-5.43), 4.88 (2.78-8.55) for PD, and 1.00 (ref.), 1.43 (0.85-2.40), 2.53 (1.53-4.19), 2.85 (1.73-4.69), 3.48 (2.14-5.65) for DA. PD and DA measured using Cumulus on processed FFDM images are positively associated with breast cancer risk, with similar magnitudes of association as previously reported for film-screen mammograms. Processed digital mammograms acquired for routine clinical care in a general practice setting are suitable for breast density and cancer research.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 25%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 10 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 11%
Psychology 2 6%
Mathematics 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 8 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 May 2016.
All research outputs
#15,169,949
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#1,328
of 2,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,872
of 348,856 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#22
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,053 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 348,856 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.