Robustness of computerized lesion detection and classification scheme across different breast US platforms

Radiology

Volumn 237, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 834-840

  Drukker, Karen ^a   Giger, Maryellen L ^a   Metz, Charles E ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; ECHOGRAPHY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RISK ASSESSMENT; ROC CURVE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TUMOR LOCALIZATION; ULTRASOUND;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; BREAST DISEASES; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; ULTRASONOGRAPHY, MAMMARY;

EID: 27744601340     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2373041418     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Smart CR, Byrne C, Smith RA, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of the breast cancers diagnosed during the breast cancer detection demonstration project. CA Cancer J Clin 1997;47:134-149.
2. Tabar L, Vitak B, Tony HH, Yen MF, Duffy SW, Smith RA. Beyond randomized controlled trials: organized mammographic screening substantially reduces breast carcinoma mortality. Cancer 2001;91:1724-1731.
3. Tabar L, Vitak B, Chen HH, et al. The Swedish two-county trial twenty years later: updated mortality results and new insights from long-term follow-up. Radiol Clin North Am 2000;38:625-651.
4. Feig SA. Effect of service screening mammography on population mortality from breast carcinoma. Cancer 2002;95:451-457.
5. Humphrey LL, Helfand M, Chan BK, Woolf SH. Breast cancer screening: a summary of the evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med 2002;137:347-360.
6. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Occult cancer in women with dense breasts: detection with screening US - diagnostic yield and tumor characteristics. Radiology 1998;207:191-199.
7. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, Sickles EA, Ernster V. Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. JAMA 1996;276:33-38.
8. Kolb TM, Lichy J, Newhouse JH. Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. Radiology 2002;225:165-175.
9. Dempsey PJ. Breast sonography: historical perspective, clinical applications and image interpretation. Ultrasound Q 1998;6:69-90.
10. Mendelson EB. The breast. In: Rumack CM, Wilson SR, Charboneau JW, eds. Diagnostic ultrasound. 2nd ed. St Louis, Mo: Mosby, 1998; 751-789.
11. Jackson VP, Kelly-Fry E, Rothschild PA, Holden RW, Clark SA. Automated breast sonography using a 7.5 MHz PVDF transducer: preliminary clinical evaluation. Radiology 1986;159:679-684.
12. Rahbar G, Sie AC, Hansen GC, et al. Benign versus malignant solid breast masses: US differentiation. Radiology 1999;213:889-894.
13. American College of Radiology. Standard for the performance of the breast ultrasound examination. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2002; 593-595.
14. Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL, Dennis MA, Parker SH, Sisney GA. Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 1995;196:123-134.
15. Gordon PB, Goldenberg SL. Malignant breast masses detected only by ultrasound: a retrospective review. Cancer 1995;76:626-630.
16. Berg WA, Gilbreath PL. Multicentric and multifocal cancer: whole-breast US in preoperative evaluation. Radiology 2000;214:59-66.
17. Kaplan SS. Clinical utility of bilateral whole-breast US in the evaluation of women with dense breast tissue. Radiology 2001;221:641-649.
18. Buchberger W, Niehoff A, Obrist P, DeKoekkoek-Doll P, Dunser M. Clinically and mammographically occult breast lesions: detection and classification with high-resolution sonography. Semin Ultrasound CT MR 2000;21:325-336.
19. Karssemeijer N, Otten JD, Verbeek AL, et al. Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms. Radiology 2003;227:192-200.
20. Horsch K, Giger ML, Venta LA, Vyborny CJ. Automatic segmentation of breast lesions on ultrasound. Med Phys 2001;28:1652-1659.
21. Horsch K, Giger ML, Venta LA, Vyborny CJ. Computerized diagnosis of breast lesions on ultrasound. Med Phys 2002;29:157-164.
22. Drukker K, Giger ML, Horsch K, Kupinski MA, Vyborny CJ, Mendelson EB. Computerized lesion detection on breast ultrasound. Med Phys 2002;29:1438-1446.
23. Drukker K, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, Schmidt RA, Mendelson EB, Stern M. Computerized detection and classification of lesions on breast ultrasound. In: Sonka M, Fitzpatrick JM, eds. Proceedings of SPIE: medical imaging 2003 - image processing. Vol 5032. Bellingham, Wash: International Society for Optical Engineering, 2003; 106-110.
24. Drukker K, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, Mendelson EB. Computerized detection and classification of cancer on breast ultrasound. Acad Radiol 2004;11:526-535.
25. Kupinski MA, Giger ML. Automated seeded lesion segmentation on digital mammograms. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 1998;17:510-517.
26. Kupinski MA, Giger ML, Bahr AE. Computerized detection of mass lesions in digital mammography using radial gradient index filtering (abstr). Radiology 1999;213(P):566.
27. Kupinski MA, Edwards DC, Giger ML, Metz CE. Ideal observer approximation using Bayesian classification neural networks. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2001;20:886-899.
28. Kupinski MA, Giger ML. Feature selection with limited datasets. Med Phys 1999;26:2176-2182.
29. Lachenbruch PL. Discriminant analysis. London, England: Hafner, 1975.
30. Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978;8:283-298.
31. Metz CE, Herman BA, Shen JH. Maximum likelihood estimation of receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves from continuously-distributed data. Stat Med 1998;17:1033-1053.
32. Metz CE, Herman BA, Roe CA. Statistical comparison of two ROC curve estimates obtained from partially-paired datasets. Med Decis Making 1998;18:110-121.
33. Bunch PC, Hamilton JF, Sanderson GK, Simmons AH. A free-response approach to the measurement and characterization of radiographic-observer performance. J Appl Photographic Eng 1978;4:166-171.
34. Holm S. A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scand J Stat 1979;6:65-70.
35. Joo S, Yang YS, Moon WK, Kim HC. Computer-aided diagnosis of solid breast nodules: use of an artificial neural network based on multiple sonographic features. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2004;23:1292-1300.
36. Sehgal CM, Cary TW, Kangas SA, et al. Computer-based margin analysis of breast sonography for differentiating malignant and benign masses. J Ultrasound Med 2004;23:1201-1209.
37. Piliouras N, Kalatzis I, Dimitropoulos N, Cavouras D. Development of the cubic least squares mapping linear-kernel support vector machine classifier for improving the characterization of breast lesions on ultrasound. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2004;28:247-255.
38. Sahiner B, Chan HP, Roubidoux MA, et al. Computerized characterization of breast masses on three-dimensional ultrasound volumes. Med Phys 2004;31:744-754.