Ernest U. Ekpo

TL;DR: Overall, with regard to mammographic breast density classification, radiologists had substantial interreader agreement when a four-category scale was used and almost perfect interreader agreements when a dichotomous Scale was used.

TL;DR: Current status of knowledge around error rates in mammography and factors impacting it are reviewed and potential solutions for maximizing diagnostic efficacy are presented thus benefiting the millions of women who undergo this procedure each year.

TL;DR: It is suggested that readers can distinguish patients who were diagnosed with cancer, from individuals without breast cancer (normal category), at above-chance levels based on a half-second glimpse of the mammograms even before any lesion becomes visible on the mammogram.

TL;DR: Existing evidence shows Cumulus has better reproducibility than that of the breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS®) but still suffers from subjective variability; MedDensity is limited by image noise, whilst Volpara and Quantra are robust and consistent.

TL;DR: The historical background to breast density measurement is outlined, current evidence based practice is explained, and automated volumetric approaches are explained while ultrasound, digital breast tomosynthesis, molecular breast imaging, and magnetic resonance imaging are introduced as valuable adjuncts to digital mammography for imaging the dense breast.