A new automated software system to evaluate breast MR examinations: Improved specificity without decreased sensitivity

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 187, Issue 1, 2006, Pages 51-56

  Lehman, Constance D ^a   Peacock, Sue ^a   DeMartini, Wendy B ^a   Chen, Xiaoming ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

BI RADS; Breast cancer; Computer aided detection; Mammography; MRI

Indexed keywords

APPARATUS; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; BREAST DISEASE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DATA ANALYSIS SOFTWARE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; EVALUATION; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FISHER EXACT TEST; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; KINETICS; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STUDENT T TEST; BREAST TUMOR; COMPUTER PROGRAM; IMAGE PROCESSING; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED;

CONTRAST MEDIUM;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CONTRAST MEDIA; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SOFTWARE;

EID: 33747118755     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.05.0269     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Kriege M, Brekelmans C, Boetes C, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med 2004; 29 351:427-437
2. Warner E, Plewes DB, Hill KA, et al. Surveillance of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with magnetic resonance imaging, ultrasound, mammography, and clinical breast examination. JAMA 2004; 292:1317-1325
3. Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Obdeijn IM, Bartels KC, de Koning HJ, Oudkerk M. First experiences in screening women at high risk for breast cancer with MR imaging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2000; 63:53-60
4. Podo F, Sardanelli F, Canese R, et al. The Italian multi-centre project on evaluation of MRI and other imaging modalities in early detection of breast cancer in subjects at high genetic risk. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2002; 21[3 suppl]:115-124
5. Esserman L, Wolverton D, Hylton N. Magnetic resonance imaging for primary breast cancer management: current role and new applications. Endocr Relat Cancer 2002; 9:141-153
6. Hwang ES, Kinkel K, Esserman LJ, Lu Y, Weidner N, Hylton NM. Magnetic resonance imaging in patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma-in-situ: value in the diagnosis of residual disease, occult invasion, and multicentricity. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10:381-388
7. Hata T, Takahashi H, Watanabe K, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging for preoperative evaluation of breast cancer: a comparative study with mammography and ultrasonography. J Am Coll Surg 2004; 198:190-197
8. Morris EA. Breast cancer imaging with MRI. Radiol Clin North Am 2002; 40:443-466
9. Bombardieri E, Gianni L. The choice of the correct imaging modality in breast cancer management. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 31[suppl 1]:S179-S186
10. Offodile RS, Daniel BL, Jeffrey SS, Wapnir I, Dirbas FM, Ikeda DM. Magnetic resonance imaging of suspicious breast masses seen on one mammographic view. Breast J 2004; 10:416-422
11. McMahon KE, Osborne DR, Davidson AL. Role of breast magnetic resonance imaging in difficult diagnostic situations. Med J Aust 2001; 175:494-497
12. Kuhl CK, Schmutzler RK, Leutner CC, et al. Breast MR imaging screening in 192 women proved or suspected to be carriers of a breast cancer susceptibility gene: preliminary results. Radiology 2000; 215:267-279
13. Morris EA, Liberman L, Ballon DJ, et al. MRI of occult breast carcinoma in a high-risk population. AJR 2003; 181:619-626
14. Slanetz PJ, Edmister WB, Yeh ED, Talele AC, Kopans DB. Occult contralateral breast carcinoma incidentally detected by breast magnetic resonance imaging. Breast J 2002; 8:145-148
15. Viehweg P, Rotter K, Laniado M, et al. MR imaging of the contralateral breast in patients after breast-conserving therapy. Eur Radiol 2004; 14:402-408
16. Smith JA, Andreopoulou E. An overview of the status of imaging screening technology for breast cancer. Ann Oncol 2004; 15[suppl 1]:I18-I26
17. Heywang-Kobrunner SH, Bick U, Bradley WG Jr, et al. International investigation of breast MRI: results of a multicentre study (11 sites) concerning diagnostic parameters for contrast-enhanced MRI based on 519 histopathologically correlated lesions. Eur Radiol 2001; 11:531-546
18. American College of Radiology. BI-RADS: MRI, 4th ed. In: Breast imaging reporting and data system: BI-RADS atlas. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology, 2003
19. Szabo BK, Aspelin P, Wiberg MK, Bone B. Dynamic MR imaging of the breast: analysis of kinetic and morphologic diagnostic criteria. Acta Radiol 2003; 44:379-386
20. Stomper PC, Herman S, Klippenstein DL, et al. Suspect breast lesions: findings at dynamic gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging correlated with mammographic and pathologic features. Radiology 1995; 197:387-395
21. Orel SG, Schnall MD, LiVolsi VA, Troupin RH. Suspicious breast lesions: MR imaging with radiologic-pathologic correlation. Radiology 1994; 190:485-493
22. Kuhl CK, Mielcareck P, Klaschik S, et al. Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology 1999; 211:101-110
23. Boetes C, Barentsz JO, Mus RD, et al. MR characterization of suspicious breast lesions with a gadolinium-enhanced turboFLASH subtraction technique. Radiology 1994; 193:777-781
24. Harms SE. Technical report of the International Working Group on Breast MRI. J Magn Reson Imaging 1999; 10:979