Utility of relative and absolute measures of mammographic density vs clinical risk factors in evaluating XXXX risk at time of screening mammography.

@entity5 @entity0
OBJECTIVE: Various clinical risk factors, including high breast density, have been shown to be associated with @entity0 . The utility of using relative and absolute area-based breast density-related measures was evaluated as an alternative to clinical risk factors in @entity5 risk assessment at the time of screening mammography. METHODS: Contralateral mediolateral oblique digital mammography images from 392 females with @entity0 and 817 age-matched controls were analysed. Information on clinical risk factors was obtained from the provincial breast-imaging information system. Breast density-related measures were assessed using a fully automated breast density measurement software. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted, and area under the receiver-operating characteristic (AUROC) curve was used to evaluate the performance of three @entity5 risk models: the first using only clinical risk factors, the second using only density-related measures and the third using both clinical risk factors and density-related measures. RESULTS: The risk factor-based model generated an AUROC of 0.535, while the model including only breast density-related measures generated a significantly higher AUROC of 0.622 (p   <   0.001). The third combined model generated an AUROC of 0.632 and performed significantly better than the risk factor model (p   <   0.001) but not the density-related measures model (p   =   0.097). CONCLUSION: Density-related measures from screening mammograms at the time of screen may be superior predictors of @entity5 compared with clinical risk factors. Advances in knowledge: @entity0 risk models based on density-related measures alone can outperform risk models based on clinical factors. Such models may support the development of personalized breast-screening protocols.
