Karabekir ERCAN, Leman GÜNBEY KARABEKMEZ

HOW DOES A WOMAN'S REPRODUCTIVE AND BREASTFEEDING HISTORY, WEIGHT, HEIGHT, BODY MASS INDEX, BREAST SIZE AND BREAST DENSITY AFFECT THE RADIATION DOSE SHE TAKES DURING MAMMOGRAPHY?

Objectives: Mammography is the screening test for breast carcinoma. The radiation dose received during this imaging has always been a point of consideration. The aim of this study is to search the relation of radiation dose received during mammographic imaging and the patient's age, menarche age, menopause age, childbirth history, total time of breastfeeding, height, weight, body mass index, mammographic breast density pattern and breast size. Materials and Methods: Patients applying for mammography imaging were questioned about their menarche age, menopause status and age and their weight, height, and breast upper and inferior mammary fold sizes were measured. Their mammographic breast density and radiation doses were recorded. Statistical analysis was made with ANOVA and Pearson correlation. Results: Breast size, weight, body mass index are found to be related to the radiation dose received during mammography. Age, number of given births, weight, body mass index and breast size have an effect on the mammographic breast density, which is a factor in both developing and diagnosing breast carcinoma. Conclusion: Breast density on mammography can show differences according to the patient's reproductive history and body stature. Radiation dose taken during a mammography is found to be affected by body mass index and breast size. Breast tissue with increased adipose tissue is suitable for mammographic imaging in the aspect of radiation exposure.

PDF

___

1. International Association of cancer Registries. Cancer incidences of five continents. [Internet]. 2014; https://publications.iarc.fr/Book-And-Report-Series/Iarc-Scientific-Publications/Cancer-Incidence-In-Five-Continents-Volume-IX-2007. (Accessed: 10.01.2022).
2. Rietman JS, Dijkstra PU, Hoekstra HJ, et al. Late morbidity after treatment of breast cancer in relation to daily activities and quality of life: a systematic review. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2003;29(3):229-38 (doi:10.1053/ejso.2002.1403).
3. Joy JE, Penhoet EE, Petitti DB. Saving Women's Lives: Strategies for Improving Breast Cancer Detection and Diagnosis. Washington (DC): National Academies Press; 2005.
4. Alexeeff SE, Odo NU, Lipson JA, et al. Age at Menarche and Late Adolescent Adiposity Associated with Mammographic Density on Processed Digital Mammograms in 24,840 Women. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention. 2017;26(9):1450-8 (doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-17-0264).
5. Hammerstein GR, Miller DW, White DR, Masterson ME, Woodard HQ, Laughlin JS. Absorbed radiation dose in mammography. Radiology. 1979;130(2):485-91 (doi:10.1148/130.2.485).
6. Bruce W. Long EDF, Ruth Ann. Radiography Essentials for Limited Practice. Elsevier; 2016.
7. Bushong SC. Radiologic Science for Technologist: Physics, Biology and Protection. 3rd ed. St Louis: The C. V. Mosby Company; 1984.
8. Edwards BL, Atkins KA, Stukenborg GJ, et al. The Association of Mammographic Density and Molecular Breast Cancer Subtype. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention. 2017;26(10):1487-92 (doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-16-0881).
9. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. The New England journal of medicine. 2007;356(3):227-36 (doi:10.1056/NEJMoa062790).
10. Boyd NF, Martin LJ, Sun L, et al. Body size, mammographic density, and breast cancer risk. Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention. 2006;15(11):2086-92 (doi:10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0345).
11. Helmrich SP, Shapiro S, Rosenberg L, et al. Risk factors for breast cancer. American journal of epidemiology. 1983;117(1):35-45 (doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113513).
12. American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging and Reporting Data System. Fifth edition. ed: Reston V A,; 2004.
13. Tamam Nissren SH, Rabbaa Mohammed, Abuljoud Mohammed, Sulieman A, Alkhorayef M, Bradley D A Evaluation of patients radiation dose during mammography imaging procedure Radiation Physics and Chemistry. 2021;188:109680.
14. Pwamang CK. Assessment of mean glandular dose to patients from digital mammography systems. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Ghana, Department of Medical Physics, Ghana; 2016:96.
15. Gilda C. Breast imaging companion. 2 ed. Philedelphia: Lippincot Williams& Wilkins; 2001.
16. Nakajima E, Iwase T, Miyagi Y, et al. Association of Parity and Infant Feeding Method with Breast Density on Mammography. Acad Radiol. 2020;27(2):e24-e6 (doi:10.1016/j.acra.2019.03.020).
17. Apter D, Reinila M, Vihko R. Some endocrine characteristics of early menarche, a risk factor for breast cancer, are preserved into adulthood. International journal of cancer. 1989;44(5):783-7 (doi:10.1002/ijc.2910440506).
18. Sweeney RI, Lewis SJ, Hogg P, McEntee MF. A review of mammographic positioning image quality criteria for the craniocaudal projection. Br J Radiol. 2018;91(1082):20170611 (doi:10.1259/bjr.20170611).
19. Kopans DB. Breast Imaging. Philedelphia: Lippincot Williams& Wilkins; 2002.
20. O'Neill SC, Leventhal KG, Scarles M, et al. Mammographic breast density as a risk factor for breast cancer: awareness in a recently screened clinical sample. Womens Health Issues. 2014;24(3):e321-6 (doi:10.1016/j.whi.2014.02.005).
21. Castillo-Garcia M, Chevalier M, Garayoa J, Rodriguez-Ruiz A, Garcia-Pinto D, Valverde J. Automated Breast Density Computation in Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Influence on Mean Glandular Dose and BIRADS Density Categorization. Acad Radiol. 2017;24(7):802-10 (doi:10.1016/j.acra.2017.01.011).