Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: Sensitivity and reproducibility in serial examinations

Radiology

Volumn 246, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 71-80

  Seung, Ja Kim ^a   Woo, Kyung Moon ^b   Cho, Nariya ^b   Joo, Hee Cha ^c   Sun, Mi Kim ^b   Jung Gilm, ^b  

^a Konkuk University Hospital   (South Korea)

^b Seoul National University Hospital   (South Korea)

^c Seoul National University Boramae Hospital   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CALCIFICATION; BREAST CANCER; COMPUTER ASSISTED RADIOGRAPHY; DIGITAL MAMMOGRAPHY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; IMAGING SYSTEM; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE ENHANCEMENT; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 37349055377     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2461062072     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. Helvie MA, Hadjiiski L, Makariou E, et al. Sensitivity of noncommercial computer-aided detection system for mammographic breast cancer detection: pilot clinical trial. Radiology 2004;231:208-214.
4. Zheng B, Hardesty LA, Poller WR, Sumkin JH, Golla S. Mammography with computer-aided detection: reproducibility assessment - initial experience. Radiology 2003;228:58-62.
5. Baker JA, Lo JY, Delong DM, Floyd CE. Computer-aided detection in screening mammography: variability in cues. Radiology 2004;233:411-417.
6. Malich A, Azhari T, Bohm T, Fleck M, Kaiser WA. Reproducibility: an important factor determining the quality of computer-aided detection (CAD) systems. Eur J Radiol 2000;36:170-174.
7. Taylor CG, Champness J, Reddy M, Taylor P, Potts HW, Given-Wilson R. Reproducibility of prompts in computer-aided detection (CAD) of breast cancer. Clin Radiol 2003;58:733-738.
8. Baum F, Fischer U, Obenauer S, Grabbe E. Computer-aided detection in direct digital full-field mammography: initial results. Eur Radiol 2002;12:3015-3017.
9. Kim SJ, Moon WK, Cho N, et al. Computer-aided detection in digital mammography: comparison of craniocaudal, mediolateral oblique, and mediolateral views. Radiology 2006;241:695-701.
10. American College of Radiology. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System; BI-RADS atlas. 4th ed. Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 2003.
11. Obuchowski NA. On the comparison of correlated proportions for clustered data. Stat Med 1998;17:1495-1507.
12. Brem RF, Hoffmeister JW, Rapelyea JA, et al. Impact of breast density on computer-aided detection for breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005;184:439-444.
13. Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL, O'Shaughnessy KF, Sickles EA, Brenner RJ. Computer-aided detection output on 172 subtle findings on normal mammograms previously obtained in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening mammography. Radiology 2004;230:811-819.
14. Brem RF, Rapelyea JA, Zisman G, Hoffmeister JW, Desimio MP. Evaluation of breast cancer with a computer-aided detection system by mammographic appearance and histopathology. Cancer 2005;104:931-935.
15. Malich A, Sauner D, Marx C, et al. Influence of breast lesion size and histologic findings on tumor detection rate of a computer-aided detection system. Radiology 2003;228:851-856.
16. Li L, Clark RA, Thomas JA. Computer-aided diagnosis of masses with full-field digital mammography. Acad Radiol 2002;9:4-12.
17. Wei J, Sahiner B, Hadjiiski LM, et al. Computer-aided detection of breast masses on full field digital mammograms. Med Phys 2005;32:2827-2838.