Clinical evaluation of computer-aided detection in breast cancer screening

Seminars in Breast Disease

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 223-230

  Feig, Stephen A ^a  

^a MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; REVIEW; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 0037783495     PISSN: 10924450     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen H-H, et al: Beyond randomized trials: Organized mammographic screening substantially reduces breast cancer mortality. Cancer 91:1724-1731, 2001
2. Duffy SW, Tabar L, Chen H-H, et al: The impact of organized mammography service screening on breast carcinoma mortality in seven Swedish counties: A collaborative evaluation. Cancer 95:458-469, 2002
3. Feig SA: Clinical outcome of screening mammography: Effect of image quality. AJR 178:805-807, 2002
4. Hendrick RE: Quality assurance in mammography: Accreditation, legislation, and compliance with quality assurance standards. Radiol Clin North Am 30:243-256, 1992
5. Bassett LW, Farria DM, Bansal S, et al: Reasons for failure of a mammography unit at clinical image review in the American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program. Radiology 215:698-702, 2000
6. Monsees BS: The Mammography Quality Standards Act: An overview of regulations and guidance. Radiol Clin North Am 38:759-772, 2000
7. Attinen I, Pamilio M, Soiva M, et al: Double reading of mammography screening films: One radiologist or two? Clin Radiol 48:414-421, 1993
8. Anderson EDC, Muir B, Walsh JS, et al: The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. Clin Radiol 49: 248-251, 1994
9. Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AAS: Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 191:241-243, 1994
10. Ciatto S, Turco MRD, Morrone D, et al: Independent double reading of screening mammograms. J Med Screening 2:99-101, 1995
11. Warren RML, Duffy SW: Comparison of single reading with double reading of mammograms and change in effectiveness with experience. Br J Radiol 69:958-962, 1995
12. Deans HE, Everington D, Cordiner C, et al: Scottish experience of double reading in the National Breast Screening Programme. The Breast 7:75-79, 1998
13. Martin JE, Moskowitz M, Milbrath JR: Breast cancer missed by mammography. AJR 132:737-739, 1979
14. Bird RE, Wallace TW, Yankaskas BC: Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography. Radiology 184:613-617, 1992
15. Harvey JA, Fajardo LL, Innis CA: Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable carcinoma: Retrospective vs blinded interpretation. AJR 161:1167-1172, 1993
16. Van Dijck J, Verbeek A, Hendriks J, et al: The current detectability of breast cancer in a mammographic screening program: A review of the previous mammograms of interval and screen-detected cancers. Cancer 72:1933-1938, 1993
17. Jones RD, McLean L, Young JR, et al: Proportion of cancers detected at the first incident screen which were false negative at the prevalent screen. The Breast 5:339-343, 1996
18. Daly CA, Apthorp L, Field S: Second round cancers: How many were visible on the first round of the UK National Breast Screening Programme, three years earlier? Clin Radiol 53:25-28, 1998
19. Vitak B: Invasive interval cancers in the Ostergotland Mammographic Programme: Radiological analysis. Eur Radiol 8:639-646, 1998
20. Warren-Burhenne LS, Wood SA, D'Orsi CJ et al: Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology 215:554-562, 2000
21. Yankaskas BC, Schell MJ, Bird RE, et al: Reassessment of breast cancers missed during routine screening mammography: A community-based study. AJR 177:535-541, 2001
22. Taft R, Taylor A: Potential improvement in breast cancer detection with a novel computer-aided detection system. Applied Radiol 25-28, December 2001
23. Evans WP, Warren-Burhenne LJ, Laurie L, et al: Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: Mammographic characteristics and computer-aided detection. Radiology 225:182-189, 2002
24. Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM, O'Shaughnessy KF, et al: Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed carcinomas later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detection. Radiology 219:192-202, 2001
25. Moberg K, Grundstrom H, Tornberg S, et al: Two models for radiological reviewing of interval cancers. J Med Screen 6:35-39, 1999
26. te Brake GM, Karssemeijer N, Hendriks JHCL: Automated detection of breast carcinomas not detected in a screening program. Radiology 207:465-471, 1998
27. Garvican L, Field S: A pilot evaluation of the R2 Image Checker System and user's response in the detection of interval breast cancers on previous screening films. Clin Radiol 56:833-837, 2001
28. Moberg K, Bjurstam N, Wilczek B, et al: Computer-assisted detection of interval breast cancers. Eur J Radiol 139:104-110, 2001
29. Castellino RA, Roehrig J, Zhang W: Improved computeraided detection (CAD) algorithms for screening mammography. Radiology 217(P):400, 2000 (abstr)
30. Nakahara H, Namba K, Fukami A, et al: Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for mammography: Preliminary results. Breast Cancer (The Journal of the Japanese Breast Cancer Society) 5:401-405, 1998
31. Vyborny CJ, Doi T, O'Shaughnessy KF, et al: Breast cancer: Importance of spiculation in computer-aided detection. Radiology 215:703-707, 2000
32. Nawano S, Murakami K, Moriyama N, et al: Computer-aided diagnosis in full digital mammography. Invest Radiol 34:310-316, 1999
33. Kegelmeyer WP Jr, Pruneda JM, Bourland PD: Computeraided mammographic screening for spiculated lesions. Radiology 191:331-337, 1994
34. Thurfjell E, Gelig Thurfjell M, Egge E, et al: Sensitivity and specificity of computer-assisted breast cancer detection in mammography screening. Acta Radiol 39:384-388, 1998
35. Freer TW, Ulissey MJ: Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: Prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast cancer. Radiology 220:781-786, 2001
36. Brem RF, Schoonjans JM: Radiologist detection of microcalcifications with and without computer-aided detection: A comparative study. Clin Radiol 56:150-154, 2001
37. American College of Radiology. Illustrated Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS™) (ed 3). Reston, VA, American College of Radiology, 1998
38. Hunt KA, Rosen EL, Sickles EA: Outcome analysis for women undergoing annual versus biennial screening mammography: A review of 24,211 examinations. AJR 173:285-289, 1999
39. Yankaskas BC, Cleveland RJ, Schell MJ, et al: Association of recall rates with sensitivity and positive predictive values of screening mammography. AJR 177:543-549, 2001
40. Sickles EA: Management of probably benign lesions. Radiol Clin North Am 33:1123-1130, 1995