Use of prior mammograms in the classification of benign and malignant masses

European Journal of Radiology

Volumn 56, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 248-255

  Varela, Celia ^a   Karssemeijer, Nico ^a   Hendriks, Jan H C L ^a   Holland, Roland ^a  

^a RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasm; Cancer screening; Diagnosis; Diagnostic radiology; Observer performance

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL ORGANS; DIAGNOSIS; MAMMOGRAPHY; STATISTICAL METHODS;

BREAST NEOPLASM; CANCER SCREENING; DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGY; OBSERVER PERFORMANCE;

RADIOLOGY;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BENIGN TUMOR; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPETENCE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE DISPLAY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

AGED; AREA UNDER CURVE; BIOPSY; BREAST CYST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; DATA DISPLAY; FEMALE; FIBROADENOMA; FIBROCYSTIC BREAST DISEASE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; HYPERPLASIA; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; OBSERVER VARIATION; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; ROC CURVE;

EID: 26944448188     PISSN: 0720048X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2005.04.007     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. European commission quality control guidelines for mammographic screening, 3rd ed. European Commission;2001.
2. M.G. Thurfjell, B. Vitak, E. Azavedo, G. Svane, and E. Thurfjell Effect on sensitivity and specificity of mammography screening with or without comparison of old mammograms Acta Radiol 41 2000 52 56
3. M.P. Callaway, Boggis CRM, S.A. Astley, and I. Hutt The influence of previous films on screening mammographic interpretation and detection of breast carcinoma Clin Radiol 52 1997 527 529
4. E.S. Burnside, E.A. Sickles, R.E. Sohlich, and K.E. Dee Differential value of comparison with previous examinations in diagnostic versus screening mammography AJR 179 2002 1173 1177
5. J.H. Sumkin, B.L. Holbert, and J.S. Herrmann Optimal reference mammography: a comparison of mammograms obtained 1 and 2 years before the present examination AJR 180 2003 343 346
6. C.E. Metz Fundamental ROC analysis J. Beutel H. Kundel R. Van Metter Handbook of medical imaging: physics and psychophysics, vol 1 2000 SPIE Press Bellingham, WA 751 769
7. B. Vitak Invasive interval cancers in the Östergötland mammographic screening programme: radiological analysis Eur Radiol 8 1998 639 646
8. N. Karssemeijer, J.D.M. Otten, and A.L.M. Verbeek Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms Radiology 227 2003 192 200
9. J. Francheboud, S. Otto, and B. van Ineveld National evaluation of breast cancer screening in the Netherlands National Evaluation Team for Breast cancer screening (NETB) 2002
10. A.J. Roelofs, S. van Woudenberg, J.H.C.L. Hendriks, and N. Karssemeijer Optimized soft-copy display of digitized mammograms Proc SPIE 5034 2003 10 19
11. C.E. Metz Roc methodology in radiographic imaging Invest Radiol 21 1986 720 733
12. C.E. Metz, B.A. Herman, and J.H. Shen Maximum-likelihood estimation of receiver operating characteristic curve (roc) curves from continuously- distributed data Statist Med 17 1998 1033 1053
13. D.D. Dorfman, K.S. Berbaum, and C.E. Metz Roc rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and cases with the jackknife method Invest Radiol 27 1992 723 731
14. S.V. Beiden, R.F. Wagner, and K. Doi Independent versus sequential reading in roc studies of computer-assist modalities: Analysis of components of variance Acad Radiol 9 2002 1036 1043
15. L. Hadjiiski, H-P. Chan, and B. Sahiner Improvement in radiologists' characterization of malignant and benign breast masses on serial mammograms with computer-aided diagnosis: an roc study Radiology 233 2004 255 265
16. http://www-radiology.uchicago.edu/krl/roc_soft.htm/
17. C.E. Metz Some practical issues of experimental design and data analysis in radiological roc studies Invest Radiol 24 1989 234 245
18. D. Manning, S. Ethell, and T. Donovan Categories of observer error from eye-tracking and afroc data Proc SPIE 5372 2004 90 99
19. K.E. Dee, and E.A. Sickles Medical audit of diagnostic mammography examinations: comparison with screening outcomes obtained concurrently AJR 176 2001 729 733
20. E.D. Pisano, E.B. Cole, and E.O. Kistner Interpretation of digital mammograms: comparison of speed and accuracy of soft-copy versus printed-film display Radiology 223 2002 483 488
21. A.J. Roelofs, S. van Woudenberg, J.H. Hendriks, A. Bödicker, C.J. Evertsz, and N. Karssemeijer Performance evaluation of a digital reading station for screening mammography H.O. Peitgen Digital mammography 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin 455 459
22. J.M. Lewin, R.E. Hendrick, and C.J. D'Orsi Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4945 paired examinations Radiology 218 2001 873 880