An Alternative Approach to Measuring Volumetric Mammographic Breast Density

  • Christopher Tromans
  • Michael Brady
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4046)


The effect on the measurement of volumetric breast density of variations in physical and chemical properties of adipose and fibroglandular tissue reported in a number of studies is investigated using the authors’ model of mammographic image formation. This model is developed specifically for the measurement of breast density. The effect of varying stromal composition, a popular histopathological explanation of mammographic density, is also discussed. Given the uncertainties in tissue attenuation highlighted by this study, as well as noise, and acquisition model error, the validity of this measurement is discussed, together with alternative measurement scales. Several issues are considered, including the effect of beam quality on normalisation accuracy, and the measurement failure which can occur when clinical data falls outside the limited range defined by 100% adipose to 100% fibroglandular tissue.


Mammographic Density Breast Density Beam Quality Tissue Composition Image Receptor 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Wolfe, J.N.: The prominent duct pattern as an indicator of cancer risk. Oncology 23, 149–158 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wolfe, J.N.: Risk for breast cancer development determined by mammographic parenchymal pattern. Cancer 37, 2486–2492 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boyd, N.F., O’Sullivan, B., Campbell, J.E., Fishell, E., Simor, I., Cooke, G., Germanson, T.: Mammographic signs as risk factors for breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 45, 185–193 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Byng, J.W., Boyd, N.F., Fishell, E., Jong, R.A., Yaffe, M.J.: The quantitative analysis of mammographic densities. Phys. Med. Biol. 39, 1629–1638 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Highnam, R., Brady, M., Shepstone, B.: A representation for mammographic image processing. Med. Image Anal. 1, 1–18 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaufhold, J., Thomas, J.A., Eberhard, J.W., Galbo, C.E., Trotter, D.E.: A calibration approach to glandular tissue composition estimation in digital mammography. Med. Phys. 29, 1867–1880 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Highnam, R., Brady, M.: Mammographic image analysis. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht (1999)MATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tromans, C.: DPhil Thesis: Measuring Breast Density from X-Ray Mammograms. In: Engineering Science, Oxford University (to be submitted)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Alowami, S., Troup, S., Al-Haddad, S., Kirkpatrick, I., Watson, P.H.: Mammographic density is related to stroma and stromal proteoglycan expression. Breast Cancer Res. 35, R129–R135 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hammerstein, G.R., Miller, D.W., White, D.R., Masterson, M.E., Woodard, H.Q., Laughlin, J.S.: Absorbed radiation dose in mammography. Radiology 130, 485–491 (1979)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tissue substitutes in radiation dosimetry and measurement. ICRU Report 44, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (1989)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Poletti, M.E., Goncalves, D., Mazzaro, I.: X-ray scattering from human breast tissues and breast-equivalent materials. Phys. Med. Biol. 47, 47–63 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Woodard, H.Q., White, D.R.: The composition of body tissues. Br. J. Radiol. 59, 1209–1218 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher Tromans
    • 1
  • Michael Brady
    • 1
  1. 1.Wolfson Medical Vision Laboratory, Department of Engineering ScienceUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations