Receiver operating characteristic analysis for the detection of simulated microcalcifications on mammograms using hardcopy images

Physics in Medicine and Biology

Volumn 51, Issue 16, 2006, Pages 3901-3919

  Lai, Chao Jen ^a   Shaw, Chris C ^a   Whitman, Gary J ^a   Yang, Wei T ^a   Dempsey, Peter J ^a   Nguyen, Victoria ^a   Ice, Mary F ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL ORGANS; CALCIFICATION (BIOCHEMISTRY); CARBONATES; CHARGE COUPLED DEVICES; ENZYME KINETICS; FLAT PANEL DISPLAYS; MEDICAL IMAGING; SIGNAL RECEIVERS; X RAY ANALYSIS;

ANTHROPOMORPHIC BREAST PHANTOM; BREAST TISSUE-EQUIVALENT MATERIAL; MICROCALCIFICATIONS (MC).; SCREEN-FILM (SF) COMBINATION;

MAMMOGRAPHY;

CALCIUM CARBONATE;

ADIPOSE TISSUE; ANTHROPOMETRY; ARTICLE; BREAST; CALCIFICATION; COMPARATIVE STUDY; IMAGE ANALYSIS; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; SCORING SYSTEM; SIMULATION; TISSUE STRUCTURE; X RAY;

BREAST DISEASES; CALCINOSIS; EQUIPMENT FAILURE ANALYSIS; HUMANS; PHANTOMS, IMAGING; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; ROC CURVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; X-RAY INTENSIFYING SCREENS;

EID: 33746822990     PISSN: 00319155     EISSN: 13616560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1088/0031-9155/51/16/002     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. American College of Radiology 2003 Illustrated Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4th edn (Reston, VA: American College of Radiology)
2. Asaga T, Chiyasu S, Mastuda S, Mastuura H, Kato H, Ishida M and Komaki T 1987 Breast imaging: dual-energy projection radiography with digital radiography Radiology 164 869-70
3. Barten P G J 1999 Contrast Sensitivity of the Human Eye and its Effects on Image Quality (Bellingham, WA: SPIE Optical Engineering Press)
4. Berns E A, Hendrick R E and Cutter G R 2002 Performance comparison of full-field digital mammography to screen-film mammography in clinical practice Med. Phys. 29 830-4
5. Boone J M and Lindfors K K 2001 The effect of breast density on cancer detection performance in mammography J. Women's Imaging 3 122-8
6. Carton A K, Bosmans H, Vandenbroucke D, Souverijns G, Van Ongeval C, Dragusin O and Marchal G 2004 Quantification of Al-equivalent thickness of just visible microcalcifications in full field digital mammograms Med. Phys. 31 2165-76
7. Chan H P, Sahiner B, Helvie M A, Petrick N, Roubidoux M A, Wilson T E, Adler D D, Paramagul C, Newman J S and Sanjay-Gopal S 1999 Improvement of radiologists' characterization of mammographic masses by using computer-aided diagnosis: an ROC study Radiology 212 817-27
8. Chen B and Ning R 2002 Cone-beam volume CT breast imaging: feasibility study Med. Phys. 29 755-70
9. Chen L, Shaw C C, Tu S-J, Altunbas M, Wang T, Lai C-J and Liu X 2005 Cone-beam CT breast imaging with a flat panel detector-a simulation study Proc. SPIE 5745 943-51
10. Cowen A R, Launders J H, Jadav M and Brettle D S 1997 Visibility of microcalcifications in computed and screen-film mammography Phys. Med. Biol. 42 1533-48
11. Desponds L, Depeursinge C, Grecescu M, Hessler C, Samiri A and Valley J F 1991 Image quality index (IQI) for screen-film mammography Phys. Med. Biol. 36 19-33
12. Doi K, Giger M, Nishikawa R M and Schmidt R A 1997 Computer-aided diagnosis of breast cancer on mammograms Breast Cancer 4 228-33
13. Dorfman D D, Berbaum K S, Lenth R V, Chen Y F and Donaghy B A 1998 Monte Carlo validation of a multireader method for receiver operating characteristic discrete rating design: factorial experimental design Acad. Radiol. 5 591-602
14. Dorfman D D, Berbaum K S and Metz C E 1992 Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method Invest. Radiol. 27 723-31
15. Evans D S, Workman A and Payne M 2002 A comparison of the imaging properties of CCD-based devices used for small field digital mammography Phys. Med. Biol. 47 117-35
16. Fischer U, Baum F, Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Vosshenrich R and Grabbe E 2002 Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: Full-field digital mammography versus screen-film mammography Eur. Radiol. 12 2679-83
17. Fischmann A, Siegmann K C, Wersebe A, Claussen C D and Muller-Schimpfle M 2005 Comparison of full-field digital mammography and film-screen mammography: image quality and lesion detection Br. J. Radiol. 78 312-5
18. Funke M, Breiter N, Hermann K P, Oestmann J W and Grabbe E 1998 Storage phosphor direct magnification mammography in comparison with conventional screen-film mammography-A phantom study Br. J. Radiol. 71 528-34
19. Grunert J H, Barbey M, Berndt G, Borchert B, Farber A, Gmelin E, Ratmann R and Rautmann B 2001 DIMA enlargement mammography in microcalcifications: A prospective study with ROC analysis Eur. Radiol. 11 284-91
20. Gur D, King J L, Rockette H E, Britton C A, Thaete F L and Hoy R J 1990 Practical issues of experimental ROC analysis. Selection of controls Invest. Radiol. 25 583-6
21. Hermann K P, Obenauer S, Funke M and Grabbe E H 2002 Magnification mammography: a comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for the detection of simulated small masses and microcalcifications Eur. Radiol. 12 2188-91
22. Jenning R J, Jafroudi H, Gagne R M, Fewell T R, Quinn P W, Steller Artz D E, Vucich J J, Freedman M T and Mun S K 1996 Storage-phosphor-based digital mammography using a low-dose x-ray system optimized for screen-film mammography Proc. SPIE 2708 202-32
23. Jiang Y, Nishikawa R M, Schmidt R A, Metz C E, Giger M L and Doi K 1999 Improving breast cancer diagnosis with computer-aided diagnosis Acad. Radiol. 6 22-33
24. Johns P C, Drost D J, Yaffe M J and Fenster A 1985 Dual-energy mammography: initial experimental results Med. Phys. 12 297-304
25. Kimme-Smith C M, Bassett L W, Gold R H and Gormley L 1989 Digital mammography. A comparison of two digitization methods Invest. Radiol. 24 869-75
26. Kotre C J 1998 The effect of background structure on the detection of low contrast objects in mammography Br. J. Radiol. 71 1162-7
27. Lai C J, Shaw C C, Whitman G J, Johnston D A, Yang W T, Selinko V, Arribas E, Dogan B and Kappadath S C 2005 Visibility of simulated microcalcifications-a hard copy based comparison of three mammographic systems Med. Phys. 32 182-94
28. Lemacks M R, Kappadath S C, Shaw C C, Liu X and Whitman G J 2002 A dual-energy subtraction technique for microcalcification imaging in digital mammography-a signal-to-noise analysis Med. Phys. 29 1739-51
29. Lewin J M, D'Orsi C J, Hendrick R E, Moss L J, Isaacs P K, Karellas A and Cutter G R 2002 Clinical comparison of full-field digital mammography and screen-film mammography for detection of breast cancer Am. J. Roentgenol. 179 671-7
30. Lewin J M, Hendrick R E, D'Orsi C J, Isaacs P K, Moss L J, Karellas A, Sisney G A, Kuni C C and Cutter G R 2001 Comparison of full-field digital mammography with screen-film mammography for cancer detection: results of 4945 paired examinations Radiology 218 873-80
31. Liu X, Shaw C C, Rong X J and Lemacks M R 2001 Comparison of a-Si:H/CsI flat-panel digital imaging systems with CR and CCD based systems - image quality measurements Proc. SPIE 4320 389-98
32. Mainprize J G, Ford N L, Yin S, Tumer T and Yafee M J 1999 Image quality of a prototype direct conversion detector for digital mammography Proc. SPIE 3659 398-406
33. Mandelson M T, Oestreicher N, Porters P L, White D, Finder C A, Taplin S H and White E 2000 Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers J. Natl Cancer Inst. 92 1081-7
34. Metz C E 1989 Some practical issues of experimental design and data analysis in radiological ROC studies Invest. Radiol. 24 234-45
35. Niklason L T et al 1997 Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging Radiology 205 399-406
36. Obenauer S, Luftner-Nagel S, von Heyden D, Munzel U, Baum F and Grabbe E 2002 Screen film versus full-field digital mammography: image quality, detectability and characterization of lesions Eur. Radiol. 12 1697-702
37. Pisano E D, Britt G G, Lin Y, Schell M J, Burns C B and Brown M E 2001 Factors affecting phantom scores at annual mammography facility inspection by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Acad. Radiol. 8 864-70
38. Pisano E D, Yaffe M J, Hemminger B M, Hendrick R E, Niklason L T, Maidment A D, Kimme-Smith C M, Feig S A, Sickles E A and Braeuning M P 2000 Current status of full-field digital mammography Acad. Radiol. 7 266-80
39. Rong X J et al 2002 Microcalcification detectability for four mammographic detectors: flat-panel, CCD, CR, and screen/film Med. Phys. 29 2052-61
40. Rosen D, Phillips W, Stanton M, Xie J, O'Mara D and Stewart A 1997 A prototype CCD-based detector for whole breast digital mammography Proc. SPIE 3032 52-8
41. Sabol J M, Soutar I C and Plewes D B 1993 Observer performance and dose efficiency of mammographic scanning equalization radiography Med. Phys. 20 1517-25
42. Shaw C C, Liu X, Lemacks M R, Rong J X and Whitman G J 2000 Optimization of MTF and DQE in magnification radiography-a theoretical analysis Proc. SPIE 3977 466-75
43. Suryanarayanan S, Karellas A, Vedantham S, Glick S J, D'Orsi C J, Baker S P and Webber R L 2000 Comparison of tomosynthesis methods used with digital mammography Acad. Radiol. 7 1085-97
44. Suryanarayanan S, Karellas A, Vedantham S, Ved H, Baker S P and D'Orsi C J 2002 Flat-panel digital mammography system: contrast-detail comparison between screen-film radiographs and hard-copy images Radiology 225 801-7
45. Tesic M M, Fisher P M and Munier B 1999 Full field digital mammography scanner Eur. J. Radiol. 31 2-17
46. van Gils C H, Otten J D, Verbeek A L, Hendriks J H and Holland R 1998 Effect of mammographic breast density on breast cancer screening performance: a study in Nijmegen, The Netherlands J. Epidemiol. Community Health 52 267-71
47. Vedantham S et al 2000a Full breast digital mammography with an amorphous silicon-based flat panel detector: physical characteristics of a clinical prototype Med. Phys. 27 558-67
48. Vedantham S, Karellas A, Suryanarayanan S, Levis I, Sayag M, Kleehammer R, Heidsieck R and D'Orsi C J 2000b Mammographic imaging with a small format CCD-based digital cassette: physical characteristics of a clinical system Med. Phys. 27 1832-40
49. Yaffe M J and Rowlands J A 1997 X-ray detectors for digital radiography Phys. Med. Biol. 42 1-39
50. Zheng B, Shah R, Wallace L, Hakim C, Ganott M A and Gur D 2002 Computer-aided detection in mammography: an assessment of performance on current and prior images Acad. Radiol. 9 1245-50