Quantitative characterization of mass lesions on digitized mammograms for computer-assisted diagnosis

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 35, Issue 6, 2000, Pages 366-372

  Leichter, Isaac ^a   Buchbinder, Shalom ^b   Bamberger, Philippe ^a   Novak, Boris ^a   Fields, Scott ^c   Lederman, Richard ^c  

^a JERUSALEM COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Israel)

^b ALBERT EINSTEIN COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c HADASSAH HEBREW UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Israel)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasms; Computer aided diagnosis; Digital mammography; Receiver operating characteristic analysis

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CARCINOMA; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIGITAL RADIOGRAPHY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE DIAGNOSIS; RADIOLOGIST; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC;

EID: 0034120957     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00004424-200006000-00005     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Parker SL, Tong T, Belden S, Wingo PA. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J Clin 1997:47:5-27.
2. Tabar L, Fagerberg CJG, Gad A, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography: Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet 1985;8433:829-832.
3. Tabar L, Fagerberg G, Duffy SW, et al. Update of the Swedish two-county program of mammographic screening for breast cancer. Radiol Clin North Am 1992;30:187-210.
4. Giger M, MacMahon H. Image processing and computer-aided diagnosis. Radiol Clin North Am 1996;34:565-595.
5. Howard J. Using mammography for cancer control: An unrealized potential. CA Cancer J Clin 1987;37:33-48.
6. Kopans DB. The positive predictive value of mammography. AJR 1992;158:521-526.
7. Knutzen AM, Gisvold JJ. Likelihood of malignant disease for various categories of mammographically detected, nonpalpable breast lesions. Mayo Clin Proc 1993;68:454-460.
8. Vyborny CJ, Giger ML. Computer vision and artificial intelligence in mammography. AJR 1994;162:699-708.
9. Feig S, Yaffe M. Digital mammography, computer-aided diagnosis, and telemammography. Radiol Clin North Am 1995;33:1205-1230.
10. D'Orsi CJ, Getty DJ, Swets JA, et al. Reading and decision aids for improved accuracy and standardization of mammographic diagnosis. Radiology 1992;184:619-622.
11. Wei D, Chan HP, Helvie MA, et al. Classification of mass and normal breast tissue on digital mammograms: Multiresolution texture analysis. Med Phys 1995;22:1501-1513.
12. Nab, H, Karssemeijer N, Van Erning L, Hendriks J. Comparison of digital and conventional mammography: ROC study of 270 mammograms. Med Inform 1992;17:125-131.
13. Baker JA, Kornguth PJ, Lo JY, et al. Breast cancer: Prediction with artificial neural network based on BI-RADS standardized lexicon. Radiology 1995;196:817-822.
14. Fields S, Leichter I, Bamberger P, et al. Clinical evaluation of computerized enhancement and analysis of mammographic findings. In: Doi K, Giger ML, Nishikawa RM, Schmidt RA, eds. Digital mammography '96. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 1996:81-86.
15. Leichter I, Lederman R, Bamberger P, et al. The use of an interactive software program for quantitative characterization of microcalcifications on digitized film-screen mammograms. Invest Radiol 1999; 34:394-400.
16. Wilcoxon F. Individual comparisons by ranking methods. Biometrics Bull 1945;1:80-83.
17. Welch BL. The generalization of Student's problem when several different population variances are involved. Biometrika 1947;34:28-35.
18. Yerushalmy J. Statistical problems in assessing methods of medical diagnosis with special reference to X-ray techniques. Public Health Rep 1947;62:1432-1449.
19. Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978; 8:283-298.
20. Linver MN. The medical audit: Statistical basis of clinical outcomes analysis. In: Bassett LW, Jackson VP, Jahan R, Fu JS, Gold RH, eds. Diagnosis of diseases of the breast. New York, NY: WB Saunders; 1997.
21. Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley; 1981.
22. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982;143:29-36.
23. Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 1983;148:839-843.
24. Kendall MG, Stuart A. The advanced theory of statistics, vol. 3: Design and analysis, and time-series. London, England: C. H. Griffin; 1968:314-341.
25. Nishikawa RM, Giger ML, Doi K, et al. Effect of case selection on the performance of computer-aided detection schemes. Med Phys 1994;21:265-269.
26. Beam CA, Layde PM, Sullivan DC. Variability on the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156:209-213.
27. Huo Z, Giger M.L, Vybrony CJ, et al. Automated computerized classification of malignant and benign masses on digitized mammograms. Acad Radiol 1998;5:155-168.
28. D'Orsi CJ, Kopans DB. Mammographic feature analysis. Semin Roentgenol 1993;27:204-230.
29. Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, et al. The breast imaging reporting and data system: Positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. Am J Reontgenol 1998;171:35-40.
30. Rangayyam RM, El-Faramawy NM, Desautels JE, Alim OA. Measures of acutance and shape for classification of breast tumors. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1998;16:799-810.
31. Fogel DB, Wasson EC 3rd, Boughton EM, Porto VW. Evolving artificial neural networks for screening features from mammograms. Artif Intell Med 1998;14:317-326.
32. Zheng B, Chang YH, Wang XH, et al. Feature selection for computerized mass detection in digitized mammograms by using a genetic algorithm. Acad Radiol 1999;6:327-332.
33. Pohlman S, Powell KA, Obuchowski NA, et al. Quantitative classification of breast tumors in digitized mammograms. Med Phys 1996; 23:1337-1345.
34. Huo Z, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, et al. Analysis of spiculation in the computerized classification of mammographic masses. Med Phys 1995;22:1569-1579.
35. Cleasen JR, Sufi P, Brown C, et al. The role of texture analysis in obtaining additional information from digitised mammograms. In: Lemke HU, Inamura K, Vannier MW, Farman AG, eds. CARS '99: Computer-assisted radiology and surgery. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier; 1999:27-31.
36. Chang YH, Zheng B, Good WF, Gur D. Identification of clustered microcalcifications on digitized mammograms using morphology and topography-based computer-aided detection schemes: A preliminary experiment. Invest Radiol 1998;33:746-751.
37. Chang YH, Good WF, Sumkin JH, et al. Computerized localization of breast lesions from two views: An experimental comparison of two methods. Invest Radiol 1999;34:585-588.
38. Nawano S, Murakami K, Morlyama N, et al. Computer-aided diagnosis in full digital mammography. Invest Radiol 1999;34:310-316.