Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 Apr 6;48(4):971–981. doi: 10.1002/jmri.26041

Table 1.

Summary characteristics of the samples used in the different analysis.

Study samples Sample 1 Sample 2
Purpose To evaluate the concordance by comparing with MDa To assess the test-retest reproducibility
Inclusion criteria Patients underwent digital mammography within 6 months from the date of MRI scan Patients received test-retest scans (For each test-retest scan, the patient left the scanner and was immediately repositioned in the scanner, re-registered and re-localized)
Exclusion criteria for the analysis The change of MD was larger than 10% between baseline and follow-up mammograms (1–2 years apart).b n/a
Number of patients (age) n=40 (age mean ± SD: 56.1 ± 8.4 years) n=10 (age mean ± SD: 56.4 ± 10.4 years); 7 with test-retest at 3 time-points, 2 with test-retest at 2 time-points, 1 with test-retest at 1 time-point; for the same patient, scans are 6 months apart
Number of scans 40 (35 from GE scanner, 5 from Siemens scanner) 26 × 2 (24 from GE scanner, 2 from Siemens scanner)
Number of unaffected breasts 42 (both breasts of 2 patients from GE scanner were unaffected) 26 × 2 (all patients had one unaffected breast)
a

MD: mammographic density

b

This is to exclude patients with large breast density fluctuations