Testing the effect of computer-assisted detection on interpretive performance in screening mammography

American Journal of Roentgenology

Volumn 187, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 1475-1482

  Taplin, Stephen H ^a,b   Rutter, Carolyn M ^a   Lehman, Constance D ^c  

^a CENTER FOR HEALTH STUDIES   (United States)

^b NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

Author keywords

BI RADS; Breast cancer; Computer assisted detection; Diagnosis; Screening mammography

Indexed keywords

ADIPOSE TISSUE; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DENSITY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

BREAST; BREAST NEOPLASMS; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAMMOGRAPHY; MASS SCREENING; OBSERVER VARIATION; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 33751249656     PISSN: 0361803X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2214/AJR.05.0940     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Quality Mammography Standards: Final Rule. 21 CFR § 16 and 900 [docket no. 95N-0192], RIN 0910-AA24 ed. Washington, DC: Department of Health and Human Services. 1997
2. Fintor L, Brown M, Fischer R, et al. The impact of mammography quality improvement legislation in Michigan: implication for the National Quality Standards Act. Am J Public Health 1998; 88:667-671
3. McLelland R, Hendrick RE, Zinninger MD, Wilcox PA. The American College of Radiology Mammography Accreditation Program. AJR 1991; 157:473-479
4. Pisano ED, Schell M, Rollins J, et al. Has the Mammography Quality Standards Act affected the mammography quality in North Carolina? AJR 2000; 174:1089-1091
5. Hendrick RE, Chrvala CA, Plott CM, Cutter GR, Jessop NW, Wilcox-Buchalla P. Improvement in mammography quality control: 1987-1995. Radiology 1998; 207:663-668
6. Beam CA, Layde PM, Sullivan DC. Variability in the interpretation of screening mammograms by US radiologists: findings from a national sample. Arch Intern Med 1996; 156:209-213
7. Elmore JG, Miglioretti DL, Reisch LM, et al. Screening mammograms by community radiologists: variability in false-positive rates. J Natl Cancer Inst 2002; 94:1373-1380
8. Beam CA, Guse CE, Sullivan DC. A sequential chart for the audit-based evaluation of screening mammogram interpretation. Acad Radiol 1999; 6:216-223
9. Elmore JG, Wells CK, Lee CH, Howard DH, Feinstein AR. Variability in radiologists' interpretations of mammograms. N Engl J Med 1994; 331:1493-1499
10. Kerlikowske K, Grady D, Barclay J, et al. Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90:1801-1809
11. Taplin SH, Ichikawa L, Yood MU, et al. Reason for late-stage breast cancer: absence of screening or detection, or breakdown in follow-up? J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:1518-1527
12. Freer TW, Ulissey MJ. Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology 2001; 220:781-786
13. Warren Burhenne LJ, Wood SA, D'Orsi CJ, et al. Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology 2000; 215:554-562
14. [Erratum in Radiology 2000; 216:306]
15. Astley SM, Gilbert FJ. Computer-aided detection in mammography. Clin Radiol 2004; 59:390-399
16. Roque AC, Andre TC. Mammography and computerized decision systems: a review. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2002; 980:83-94
17. Nawano S, Murakami K, Moriyama N, Kobatake H, Takeo H, Shimura K. Computer-aided diagnosis in full digital mammography. Invest Radiol 1999; 34:310-316
18. Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM, O'Shaughnessy KF, Sickles EA. Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detection. Radiology 2001; 219:192-202
19. Gur D, Sumkin JH, Rockette HE, et al. Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:185-190
20. Elmore JG, Carney PA. Computer-aided detection of breast cancer: has promise outstripped performance? J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:162-163
21. Ciatto S, Rosselli Del Turco M, Burke P, Visioli C, Paci E, Zappa M. Comparison of standard and double reading and computer-aided detection (CAD) of interval cancers at prior negative screening mammograms: blind review. Br J Cancer 2003; 89:1645-1649
22. D'Orsi CJ. Computer-aided detection: there is no free lunch. Radiology 2001; 221:585-586
23. Zheng B, Ganott MA, Britton CA, et al. Soft-copy mammographic readings with different computer-assisted detection cuing environments: preliminary findings. Radiology 2001; 221:633-640
24. American College of Radiology (ACR). Breast imaging reporting and datasystem (BI-RADS), 3rd ed. Reston, VA: ACR, 1998
25. Pepe MS, Urban N, Rutter C, Longton G. Design of a study to improve accuracy in reading mammograms. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50:1327-1338
26. Yankaskas BC, Taplin SH, Ichikawa L, et al. Association between mammography timing and measures of screening performance in the U.S. Radiology 2005; 234:363-373
27. Miglioretti DL, Heagerty PJ. Marginal modeling of multilevel binary data with time-varying covariates. Biostatistics 2004; 5:381-398
28. Mancl LA, DeRouen TA. A covariance estimator for GEE with improved small-sample properties. Biometrics 2001; 57:126-134
29. Destounis SV, DiNitto P, Logan-Young W, Bonaccio E, Zuley ML, Willison KM. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false-negative rate? Initial experience. Radiology 2004; 232:578-584
30. Ho WT, Lam PW. Clinical performance of computer-assisted detection (CAD) system in detecting carcinoma in breasts of different densities. Clin Radiol 2003; 58:133-136
31. Baker JA, Rosen EL, Lo JY, Gimenez EI, Walsh R, Soo MS. Computer-aided detection (CAD) in screening mammography: sensitivity of commercial CAD systems for detecting architectural distortion. AJR 2003; 181:1083-1088
32. Liberman L, Abramson AF, Squires FB, Glassman JR, Morris EA, Dershaw DD. The Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: positive predictive value of mammographic features and final assessment categories. AJA 1998; 171:35-40
33. Qian W, Sun X, Song D, Clark RA. Digital mammography: wavelet transform and Kalman-filtering neural network in mass segmentation and detection. Acad Radiol 2001; 8:1074-1082
34. Sickles EA, Wolverton DE, Dee KE. Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography: specialist and general radiologists. Radiology 2002; 224:861-869
35. Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA. Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammogram interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2003; 95:282-290
36. Barlow WE, Chi C, Carney PA, et al. Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96:1840-1850
37. Gur D, Rockette HE, Armfield DR, et al. Prevalence effect in a laboratory environment. Radiology 2003; 228:10-14