Skip to content Provide accessibility feedback
By using the Volpara website you accept our use of cookies. Here’s our privacy statement.
Breast Health
For Patients
Customer Stories
Contact us
Magnifying glass Search

Left–right breast asymmetry and risk of screen detected and interval cancers in a large population based screening population

Hudson, Wilkinson, De Stavola, Dos-Santos-Silva

“Increased DV asymmetry was associated with the risk of a breast cancer diagnosis at a contemporaneous screen or as an interval cancer. BV asymmetry was positively associated with the risk of an interval cancer diagnosis.”

Ethnic and age differences in right-left breast asymmetry in a large population-based screening population

Hudson, Wilkinson, Denholm, De Stavola, Dos-Santos-Silva

“Automated measurements from digital raw mammographic images of 54,591 cancer-free participants (aged 47–73) in a UK breast screening programme were used to calculate absolute (cm3) and relative asymmetry in BV and DV … BV and DV absolute asymmetry were positively correlated with the corresponding volumetric dimension
(BV or DV).”

Quantification of masking risk in screening mammography with volumetric breast density maps

Holland, van Gils, Mann, Karssemeijer

“Measures based on density maps, and in particular PDA, are promising tools to identify women at high risk for a masked cancer.”

Combined effect of volumetric breast density and body mass index on breast cancer risk

Engmann, Scott, Jensen, Winham, Miglioretti, Ma, Brandt, Mahmoudzadeh, Whaley, Hruska, Wu, Norman, Hiatt, Heine, Shepherd, Pankratz, Vachon, Kerlikowske

“Volumetric percent density (VPD) and dense volume (DV) were measured with Volpara™ … The effect of volumetric percent density on breast cancer risk is strongest in overweight and obese women. These associations have clinical relevance for informing prevention strategies.”

Digital mammographic density and breast cancer risk: a case–control study of six alternative density assessment methods

Eng, Gallant, Sheperd, McCormack, Li, Dowsett, Vinnicombe, Allen, dos-Santos-Silva

“PD was positively associated with breast cancer for all methods, but with the increase in risk per standard deviation increment in PD being highest for Volpara …”

The Association of Mammographic Density and Molecular Breast Cancer Subtype

Edwards, Atkins, Stukenborg, Novicoff, Larson, Cohn, Harvey, Schroen

“Increased MD is more strongly associated with H2P tumors when compared to
LA … Delineating risk factors specific to BC subtype may promote development of
individualized risk prediction models and screening strategies.”

Mammographic density and breast cancer risk in breast screening assessment cases and women with a family history of breast cancer

Duffy, Morrish, Allgood, Black, Gillan, Willsher, Cooke, Duncan, Michell, Dobson, Maroni, Lim, Purushothaman, Suaris, Astley, Young, Tucker, Gilbert

“All density measures showed a positive association with presence of cancer and all declined with age. The strongest effect was seen with Volpara absolute density, with a significant 3% (95% CI 1e5%) increase in risk per 10 cm3 of dense tissue. The effect of Volpara volumetric density on risk was stronger for large and grade 3 tumours.”

A Case-Control Study to Add Volumetric or Clinical Mammographic Density into the Tyrer-Cuzick Breast Cancer Risk Model

Brentnall, Cohn, Knaus, Yaffe, Cuzick, Harvey

“The addition of volumetric and visual mammographic density measures to classical risk factors improves risk stratification. A combined risk could be used to guide precision medicine, through risk-adapted screening and prevention strategies.”

Supplemental MRI Screening for Women with Extremely Dense Breast Tissue

Bakker, de Lange, Pijnappel, Mann, Peeters, Monninkhof, Emaus, Loo, Bisschops, Lobbes, de Jong, Duvivier, Veltman, Karssemeijer, de Koning, van Diest, Mali, van den Bosch, Veldhuis, van Gils

“The use of supplemental MRI screening in women with extremely dense breast tissue and normal results on mammography resulted in the diagnosis of significantly fewer interval cancers than mammography alone during a 2-year screening period.”

A comparison of five methods of measuring mammographic density: a case-control study

Astley, Harkness, Sergeant, Warwick, Stavrinos, Warren, Wilson, Beetles, Gadde, Lim, Jain, Bundred, Barr, Reece, Brentnall, Cuzick, Howell, Evans

“Visual density assessment demonstrated a strong relationship with cancer, despite known inter-observer variability; however, it is impractical for population-based screening. Percentage density measured by Volpara and Densitas also had a strong association with breast cancer risk, amongst the automated measures evaluated, providing practical automated methods for risk stratification.”