Computer aids and human second reading as interventions in screening mammography: Two systematic reviews to compare effects on cancer detection and recall rate

European Journal of Cancer

Volumn 44, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 798-807

  Taylor, Paul ^a   Potts, Henry W W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Diagnosis, computer assisted; Double reading; Image interpretation, computer assisted; Mammography

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CYTODIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC APPROACH ROUTE; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; SCREENING TEST; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MENTAL RECALL; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RADIOLOGY; READING;

EID: 41949108736     PISSN: 09598049     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.02.016     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Denton E.R., and Field S. Just how valuable is double reporting in screening mammography?. Clin Radiol 52 (1997) 466-468
2. Bennett R.L., Blanks R.G., and Moss S.M. Does the accuracy of single reading with CAD (computer-aided detection) compare with that of double reading?: a review of the literature. Clin Radiol 61 (2006) 1023-1028
3. Dinnes J., Moss S., Melia J., Blanks R., and Kleijnen F.S. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of double reading of mammograms in breast cancer screening: findings of a systematic review. Breast 10 (2001) 455-463
4. Becker M.P., and Balagtas C.C. Marginal modeling of binary cross-over data. Biometrics 49 (1993) 997-1009
5. Bradburn M.J., Deeks J.J., and Altman D.G. metan - an alternative meta-analysis command. STATA Tech Bull Reprints 8 (1998) 86-100
6. Morton M.J., Whaley D.H., Brandt K.R., and Amrami K.K. Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection - prospective evaluation. Radiology 239 (2006) 375-383
7. Freer T.W., and Ulissey M.J. Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology 220 (2001) 781-786
8. Dean J.C., and Ilvento C.C. Improved cancer detection using computer-aided detection with diagnostic and screening mammography: prospective study of 104 cancers. Am J Roentgenol 187 (2006) 20-28
9. Ko J.M., Nicholas M.J., Mendel J.B., and Slanetz P.J. Prospective assessment of computer-aided detection in interpretation of screening mammography. Am J Roentgenol 187 (2006) 1483-1491
10. Birdwell R.L., Bandodkar P., and Ikeda D.M. Computer-aided detection with screening mammography in a university hospital setting. Radiology 236 (2005) 451-457
11. Fenton J.J., Taplin S.H., Carney P.A., et al. Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med 356 (2007) 1399-1409
12. Gur D., Sumkin J.H., Rockette H.E., et al. Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-aided detection system. J Natl Cancer Inst 96 (2004) 185-190
13. Cupples T.E., Cunningham J.E., and Reynolds J.C. Impact of computer-aided detection in a regional screening mammography program. Am J Roentgenol 185 (2005) 944-950
14. Georgian-Smith D., Moore R.H., Halpern E., et al. Blinded comparison of computer-aided detection with human second reading in screening mammography. Am J Roentgenol 189 (2007) 1135-1141
15. Gromet M. Comparison of computer-aided detection to double reading of screening mammograms: review of 231,221 mammograms. Am J Roentgenol 190 (2008) 1-6
16. Anttinen I., Pamilo M., Soiva M., and Roiha M. Double reading of mammography screening films - one radiologist or two?. Clin Radiol 48 (1993) 414-421
17. Williams S.M., Doyle T., Chartres S.C., Richardson A.K., and Elwood A.J. Impact of independent double reading of mammograms from the inception of a population-based breast cancer screening programme. Breast 4 (1995) 282-288
18. Brown J., Bryan S., and Warren R. Mammography screening: an incremental cost effectiveness analysis of double versus single reading of mammograms. BMJ 312 (1996) 809-812
19. Duijm L.E., Groenewoud J.H., Hendriks J.H., and de Koning H.J. Independent double reading of screening mammograms in The Netherlands: effect of arbitration following reader disagreements. Radiology 231 (2004) 564-570
20. Pauli R., Hammond S., Cooke J., and Ansell J. Comparison of radiographer/radiologist double film reading with single reading in breast cancer screening. J Med Screen 3 (1996) 18-22
21. Tonita J.M., Hillis J.P., and Lim C.H. Medical radiologic technologist review: effects on a population-based breast cancer screening program. Radiology 211 (1999) 529-533
22. Renaud R., Schaffer P., Gairard B., et al. Principes et premiers résultats de la campagne européenne de dépistage du cancer du sein dans le Bas-Rhin. Bull Acad Natl Med 175 (1991) 129-145
23. Liston J.C., and Dall B.J. Can the NHS Breast Screening Programme afford not to double read screening mammograms?. Clin Radiol 58 (2003) 474-477
24. Leivo T., Salminen T., Sintonen H., et al. Incremental cost-effectiveness of double-reading mammograms. Breast Cancer Res Treat 54 (1999) 261-267
25. Ciatto S., Ambrogetti D., Bonardi R., et al. Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme. J Med Screen 12 (2005) 103-106
26. Ciatto S., Del Turco M.R., Morrone D., et al. Independent double reading of screening mammograms. J Med Screen 2 (1995) 99-101
27. Harvey S.C., Geller B., Oppenheimer R.G., Pinet M., Riddell L., and Garra B. Increase in cancer detection and recall rates with independent double interpretation of screening mammography. Am J Roentgenol 180 (2003) 1461-1467
28. Deans H.E., Everington D., Cordiner C., and Kirkpatrick A.E. Scottish experience of double reading in the National Breast Screening Programme. Breast 7 (1998) 75-79
29. Anderson E.D., Muir B.B., Walsh J.S., and Kirkpatrick A.E. The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. Clin Radiol 49 (1994) 248-251
30. Seradour B., Wait S., Jacquemier J., Dubuc M., and Piana L. Modalités de lecture des mammographies de dépistage du programme des Bouches-du-Rhône. J Radiol 78 (1997) 49-54
31. Agbaje O.F., Astley S., Gillan M., et al. Mammography reading with computer-aided detection (CAD): Single view vs two views. In: Astley S., Brady M., Rose C., and Zwiggelaar R. (Eds). Proceedings of the 8th international workshop on digital mammography 2006 (2006), Springer, Berlin 125-129
32. Bandodkar P., Birdwell R.L., and Ikeda D.M. Computer aided detection (CAD) with screening mammography in an academic institution: preliminary findings. Radiology 225 (2002) 458
33. Destounis S. Computer-aided detection and second reading utility and implementation in a high-volume breast clinic. Appl Radiol 33 (2004) 8-15
34. Morton M.J., Whaley D.H., Brandt K.R., and Amrami K.K. The effects of computer-aided detection (CAD) on a local/regional screening mammography program: prospective evaluation of 12,646 patients. Radiology 225 (2002) 459
35. Destounis S.V., DiNitto P., Logan-Young W., Bonaccio E., Zuley M.L., and Willison K.M. Can computer-aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false-negative rate? Initial experience. Radiology 232 (2004) 578-584
36. Khoo L.A., Taylor P., and Given-Wilson R.M. Computer-aided detection in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Programme: prospective study. Radiology 237 (2005) 444-449
37. Gilbert F.J., Astley S.M., Mcgee M.A., et al. Single reading with computer-aided detection and double reading of screening mammograms in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Program. Radiology 241 (2006) 47-53
38. Garvican L., and Field S. A pilot evaluation of the R2 image checker system and users' response in the detection of interval breast cancers on previous screening films. Clin Radiol 56 (2001) 833-837
39. Menna S., Di Virgilio M.R., Burke P., et al. Diagnostic accuracy of commercial system for computer-assisted detection (CADx) as an adjunct to interpretation of mammograms. Radiol Med 110 (2005) 334-340
40. Sittek H., Perlet C., Helmberger R., Linsmeier E., Kessler M., and Reiser M. Computerassistierte analyse von mammographien in der klinischen routinediagnostik. Radiologe 38 (1998) 848-852
41. Skaane P., Kshirsagar A., Stapleton S., Young K., and Castellino R.A. Effect of computer-aided detection on independent double reading of paired screen-film and full-field digital screening mammograms. Am J Roentgenol 188 (2007) 377-384
42. Fenton J.J., Barlow W.E., and Elmore J.G. Computer-aided screening mammography. N Engl J Med 357 (2007) 85
43. Ciatto S., Ambrogetti D., Risso G., et al. The role of arbitration of discordant reports at double reading of screening mammograms. J Med Screen 12 (2005) 125-127
44. Thurfjell E. Mammography screening. One versus two views and independent double reading. Acta Radiol 35 (1994) 345-350
45. Thurfjell E. Mammography screening methods and diagnostic results. Acta Radiol Suppl 395 (1995) 1-22
46. Warren R.M., and Duffy S.W. Comparison of single reading with double reading of mammograms, and change in effectiveness with experience. Br J Radiol 68 (1995) 958-962
47. Wivell G., Denton E.R., Eve C.B., Inglis J.C., and Harvey I. Can radiographers read screening mammograms?. Clin Radiol 58 (2003) 63-67
48. Denton E.R., and Field S. Just how valuable is double reporting in screening mammography?. Clin Radiol 52 (1997) 466-468
49. Mucci B., Athey G., and Scarisbrick G. Double reading of screening mammograms: the use of a third reader to arbitrate on disagreements. Breast 8 (1999) 37-39
50. Pacher B., Tscherney R., Litmann-Rowenta B., et al. Konsensuelles zweitbefunden von mammographien in der Praxis. Rofo 176 (2004) 1766-1769
51. Thurfjell E.L., Lernevall K.A., and Taube A.A. Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 191 (1994) 241-244
52. Van der Valk P., Beijerinck D., and Deurenberg J.J. Cost-effectiveness of consensus double reading of screening mammograms. Radiology 209 (1998) 588-589
53. Vizcaino I., Salas D., Vilar J.S., Ruiz-Perales F., Herranz C., and Ibanez J. Breast cancer screening: first round in the population-based program in Valencia, Spain. Collaborative Group of Readers of the Breast Cancer Screening Program of the Valencia Community. Radiology 206 (1998) 253-260
54. Haiart D.C., and Henderson J. A comparison of interpretation of screening mammograms by a radiographer, a doctor and a radiologist: results and implications. Br J Clin Pract 45 (1991) 43-45
55. Blanks R.G., Wallis M.G., and Moss S.M. A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by breast cancer screening programmes by number of readers, for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service breast screening programme. J Med Screen 5 (1998) 95-201
56. Duijm L.E., Groenewoud J.H., Fracheboud J., and de Koning H.J. Additional double reading of screening mammograms by radiologic technologists: impact on screening performance parameters. J Natl Cancer Inst 99 (2007) 1162-1170
57. Skaane P., Hofvind S., and Skjennald A. Randomized trial of screen-film versus full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading in population-based screening program: follow-up and final results of Oslo II study. Radiology 244 (2007) 708-717
58. Doutriaux-Dumoulin I., Allioux A., Campion L., Meingan P., and Molina L. Cancers detectes par le deuxieme lecteur: analyse des donnees de la campagne de depistage du cancer du sein en Loire-Atlantique, 2003-2005 (nouveau cahier des charges). J Radiol 88 (2007) 1873-1880
59. Smith-Bindman R., Chu P.W., Miglioretti D.L., et al. Comparison of screening mammography in the United States and the United kingdom. JAMA 290 (2003) 2129-2137
60. Gur D., Sumkin J.H., Hardesty L.A., et al. Recall and detection rates in screening mammography. Cancer 100 (2004) 1590-1594