Medicine and Health Sciences Commons^™

Mammographic Density Assessed On Paired Raw And Processed Digital Images And On Paired Screen-Film And Digital Images Across Three Mammography Systems, Anya Burton, Graham Byrnes, Jennifer Stone, Rulla M. Tamimi, John Heine, Celine Vachon, Vahit Ozmen, Ana Pereira, Maria Luisa Garmendia, Christopher Scott, John H. Hipwell, Caroline Dickens, Joachim Schüz, Mustafa Erkin Aribal, Kimberly Bertrand, Ava Kwong, Graham G. Giles, John Hopper, Beatriz Pérez Gómez, Marina Pollán, Soo-Hwang Teo, Shivaani Mariapun, Nur Aishah Mohd Taib, Martín Lajous, Ruy Lopez-Riduara, Megan Rice, Isabelle Romieu, Anath Arzee Flugelman, Giske Ursin, Samera Qureshi, Huiyan Ma, Eunjung Lee, Reza Sirous, Mehri Sirous, Jong Won Lee, Jisun Kim, Dorria Salem, Rasha Kamal, Mikael Hartman, Hui Miao, Kee-Seng Chia, Chisato Nagata, Sudhir Vinayak, Rose Ndumia, Carla H. Van Gils, Johanna O. P. Wanders, Beata Peplonska, Agnieszka Bukowska, Steve Allen, Sarah Vinnicombe, Sue Moss, Anna M. Chiarelli, Linda Linton, Gertraud Maskarinec, Martin J. Yaffe, Norman F. Boyd, Isabel Dos-Santos-Silva, Valerie A. Mccormack

Imaging & Diagnostic Radiology, East Africa

Background: Inter-women and intra-women comparisons of mammographic density (MD) are needed in research, clinical and screening applications; however, MD measurements are influenced by mammography modality (screen film/ digital) and digital image format (raw/processed). We aimed to examine differences in MD assessed on these image types.

Methods: We obtained 1294 pairs of images saved in both raw and processed formats from Hologic and General Electric (GE) direct digital systems and a Fuji computed radiography (CR) system, and 128 screen-film and processed CR-digital pairs from consecutive screening rounds. Four readers performed Cumulus-based MD measurements (n = 3441), with each image pair read …