Comparison of inter- and intra-observer variability of breast density assessments using the fourth and fifth editions of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System

被引:23
作者
Alikhassi, Afsaneh [1 ,2 ]
Gourabi, Hamed Esmaili [1 ]
Baikpour, Masoud [3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Imam Khomeini Hosp, Canc Inst, Dept Radiol, Tehran 3314114197, Iran
[2] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Canc Res Ctr, Canc Inst Iran, Tehran, Iran
[3] Univ Tehran Med Sci, Sch Med, Dept Med, Tehran, Iran
来源
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF RADIOLOGY OPEN | 2018年 / 5卷
关键词
Inter-observer variability; Intra-observer variability; Breast density; Mammography;
D O I
10.1016/j.ejro.2018.04.002
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Background: Breast density is a well-known independent risk factor for breast cancer and can significantly affect the sensitivity of screening mammograms. Objective: We aimed to evaluate the intra-and inter-observer consistencies of breast density assessments using methods outlined in the fourth and fifth editions of the American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) guidelines to determine which method is more reliable. Materials and methods: Three radiologists with subspecialties in breast imaging defined breast density in 72 mammograms four times each: twice using the fourth edition of the ACR BI-RADS guidelines and twice using the fifth edition. The intra-and inter-observer agreements were calculated and compared for each method. Results: The weighted kappa values for the overall intra-observer agreement were 0.955 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.931-0.980) and 0.938 (95% CI: 0.907-0.968) when breast densities were assessed according to criteria outlined in the fourth and fifth ACR BI-RADS editions, respectively. The difference between these values was not statistically significant (p=.4). The overall Fleiss-Cohen (quadratic) weighted kappa for inter-observer agreement were 0.623 (95% CI: 0.517-0.729) and 0.702 (95% CI: 0.589-0.815) when breast densities were assessed according to criteria outlined in the fourth and fifth ACR BI-RADS editions, respectively. The difference between these values was not statistically significant (p=.32). Similarly, there were no significant differences in the evaluation of breast density (overall) when comparing breast density assignment using criteria outlined in the fourth and fifth ACR BI-RADS edition (p=.582). Conclusion: The ACR BI-RADS guideline is an acceptable method to classify breast density, resulting in substantial inter-observer agreements using criteria outlined in both the fourth and fifth editions. The intra-observer agreement was nearly perfect for radiologists using criteria outlined in both sets of guidelines. Moreover, although the percentage of women who were classified as having dense breasts was higher when radiologists used the fifth edition of ACR BI-RADS guidelines than when they used the fourth edition, this difference was not statistically significant.
引用
收藏
页码:67 / 72
页数:6
相关论文
共 25 条
  • [1] Breast imaging reporting and data system: Inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment
    Berg, WA
    Campassi, C
    Langenberg, P
    Sexton, MJ
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2000, 174 (06) : 1769 - 1777
  • [2] Detection of Breast Cancer With Addition of Annual Screening Ultrasound or a Single Screening MRI to Mammography in Women With Elevated Breast Cancer Risk
    Berg, Wendie A.
    Zhang, Zheng
    Lehrer, Daniel
    Jong, Roberta A.
    Pisano, Etta D.
    Barr, Richard G.
    Boehm-Velez, Marcela
    Mahoney, Mary C.
    Evans, W. Phil, III
    Larsen, Linda H.
    Morton, Marilyn J.
    Mendelson, Ellen B.
    Farria, Dione M.
    Cormack, Jean B.
    Marques, Helga S.
    Adams, Amanda
    Yeh, Nolin M.
    Gabrielli, Glenna
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2012, 307 (13): : 1394 - 1404
  • [3] QUANTITATIVE CLASSIFICATION OF MAMMOGRAPHIC DENSITIES AND BREAST-CANCER RISK - RESULTS FROM THE CANADIAN NATIONAL BREAST SCREENING STUDY
    BOYD, NF
    BYNG, JW
    JONG, RA
    FISHELL, EK
    LITTLE, LE
    MILLER, AB
    LOCKWOOD, GA
    TRITCHLER, DL
    YAFFE, MJ
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1995, 87 (09) : 670 - 675
  • [4] Categorizing breast mammographic density: intra- and interobserver reproducibility of BI-RADS density categories
    Ciatto, S
    Houssami, N
    Apruzzese, A
    Bassetti, E
    Brancato, B
    Carozzi, F
    Catarzi, S
    Lamberini, MP
    Marcelli, G
    Pellizzoni, R
    Pesce, B
    Risso, G
    Russo, F
    Scorsolini, A
    [J]. BREAST, 2005, 14 (04) : 269 - 275
  • [5] D'Orsi C, 2003, BREAST IMAGING REPOR
  • [6] D'Orsi C.J., 2013, ACR BIRADS ATLAS BRE, V5th ed.
  • [7] Assessment of Interradiologist Agreement Regarding Mammographic Breast Density Classification Using the Fifth Edition of the BI-RADS Atlas
    Ekpo, Ernest U.
    Ujong, Ujong Peter
    Mello-Thoms, Claudia
    McEntee, Mark F.
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ROENTGENOLOGY, 2016, 206 (05) : 1119 - 1123
  • [8] EQUIVALENCE OF WEIGHTED KAPPA AND INTRACLASS CORRELATION COEFFICIENT AS MEASURES OF RELIABILITY
    FLEISS, JL
    COHEN, J
    [J]. EDUCATIONAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL MEASUREMENT, 1973, 33 (03) : 613 - 619
  • [9] FLEISS JL, 1971, PSYCHOL BULL, V76, P378, DOI 10.1037/h0031619
  • [10] Misclassification of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Mammographic Density and Implications for Breast Density Reporting Legislation
    Gard, Charlotte C.
    Bowles, Erin J. Aiello
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    Taplin, Stephen H.
    Rutter, Carolyn M.
    [J]. BREAST JOURNAL, 2015, 21 (05) : 481 - 489