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...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Faculty of Medicine, International Islamic University Malaysia
2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/1/39216.pdf |
| _version_ | 1848781740837961728 |
|---|---|
| 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 |
| building | IIUM Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| 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. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T15:54:22Z |
| format | Article |
| id | iium-39216 |
| institution | International Islamic University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T15:54:22Z |
| publishDate | 2015 |
| publisher | Faculty of Medicine, International Islamic University Malaysia |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| 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 |
| 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 |
| title | 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_short | 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 |
| topic | R Medicine (General) |
| url | http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/ http://irep.iium.edu.my/39216/1/39216.pdf |