Trends in Clinical Breast Density Assessment From the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium

Changes to mammography practice, including revised Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) density classification guidelines and implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), may impact clinical breast density assessment. We investigated temporal trends in clinical breast density assessment among 2 990 291 digital mammography (DM) screens and 221 063 DBT screens interpreted by 722 radiologists from 144 facilities in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium. After age-standardization, 46.3% (95% CI = 44.1% to 48.6%) of DM screens were assessed as dense (heterogeneously/extremely dense) during the BI-RADS 4th edition era (2005-2013), compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) during the 5th edition era (2014-2016) (P = .93 from two-sided generalized score test). Among DBT screens in the BI-RADS 5th edition era, 45.8% (95% CI = 42.0% to 49.7%) were assessed as dense (P = .77 from two-sided generalized score test) compared to 46.5% (95% CI = 43.8% to 49.1%) dense on DM in BI-RADS 5th edition era. Results were similar when examining all four density categories and age subgroups. Clinicians, researchers, and policymakers may reasonably expect stable density distributions across screened populations despite changes to the BI-RADS guidelines and implementation of DBT.

Factors associated with non-compliance with hormone therapy cessation before screening mammography

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate factors associated with non-compliance with discontinuation of hormone therapy (HT) within a study on the effect of HT cessation on mammography performance.

METHODS

This randomized, controlled trial was conducted at Group Health, a health plan in Washington State, USA. Eligibility included: age 45-80 years; due for screening ('study') mammogram; and prior screening mammogram while using HT. We randomized 1704 women to no cessation (n = 567), 1-month (n = 570), or 2-month cessation (n = 567), and called participants before cessation to review instructions. We collected self-reported data at randomization (baseline) and before the study mammogram, including symptoms and compliance. This analysis includes women randomized to 1-month or 2-month cessation with complete baseline and follow-up questionnaires (n = 883).

RESULTS

Most participants were using unopposed estrogen (63.3%) and intended to continue HT (90%); 9.6% were non-compliant with HT cessation. Comparing 2-month vs. 1-month cessation, the age and body mass index (BMI)-adjusted relative risk (RR) for non-compliance was 1.72 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.12-2.60). Baseline variables associated with non-compliance included: age ≤55 vs. >55 years (RR 2.34; 95% CI 1.34-4.41); BMI < 25 vs. BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 (RR 1.63; 95% CI 1.01-2.63); unopposed estrogen vs. estrogen plus progestin (RR 1.59; 95% CI 1.01-2.51); using HT to manage sleep (RR 1.80; 95% CI 1.20-2.71); severe vs. no night sweats (RR 1.68; 95% CI 1.03-2.74); and night sweats that interfered with sleep (RR 1.78; 95% CI 1.02-3.11).

CONCLUSIONS

Non-compliance with HT cessation before screening mammogram was associated with younger age, lower BMI, symptom severity and use of unopposed estrogen. Alternatives for menopause symptom management are needed to assist women with HT cessation.