Can computer-aided detection be detrimental to mammographic interpretation?

Radiology

Volumn 253, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 17-22

  Philpotts, Liane E ^a  

^a YALE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER SCREENING; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HUMAN; MAMMOGRAPHY; MEDICOLEGAL ASPECT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; BREAST TUMOR; FEMALE; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; DIAGNOSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED;

EID: 70350516161     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2531090689     Document Type: Review

References (36)

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(2): 554-562. [Published correction appears in Radiology 2000;216(1):306.]
2. Brem RF, Baum J, Lechner M, et al. Improvement in sensitivity of screening mammography with computer-aided detection: a multiinstitutional trial. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003;181(3):687-693.
3. 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(1):192-202.
4. Birdwell RL, Bandodkar P, Ikeda DM. Computer-aided detection with screening mammography in a university hospital setting. Radiology 2005;236(2):451-457.
5. Freer TW, Ulissey MJ. Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology 2001; 220(3):781-786.
6. Gilbert FJ, Astley SM, McGee MA, et al. Single reading with computer-aided detection and double reading of screening mammograms in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Program. Radiology 2006; 241(1):47-53.
7. Ikeda DM, Birdwell RL, O'Shaughnessy KF, Brenner RJ, Sickles EA. Analysis of 172 subtle findings on prior normal mammograms in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening. Radiology 2003;226(2): 494-503.
8. Gur D, Bandos AI, Cohen CS, et al. The "laboratory" effect: comparing radiologists' performance and variability during prospective clinical and laboratory mammography interpretations. Radiology 2008;249(1): 47-53.
9. 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(3):185-190.
10. Fenton JJ, Taplin SH, Carney PA, et al. Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med 2007;356(14):1399-1409.
11. Gilbert FJ, Astley SM, Gillan MG, et al. Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography. N Engl J Med 2008;359(16):1675-1684.
12. Khoo LA, Taylor P, Given-Wilson RM. Computer-aided detection in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Programme: prospective study. Radiology 2005;237(2):444-449.
13. Obenauer S, Sohns C, Werner C, Grabbe E. Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: detection in dependence of the BI-RADS categories. Breast J 2006; 12(1):16-19.
14. Soo MS, Rosen EL, Xia JQ, Ghate S, Baker JA. Computer-aided detection of amorphous calcifications. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2005; 184(3):887-892.
15. Malich A, Schmidt S, Fischer DR, Facius M, Kaiser WA. The performance of computer-aided detection when analyzing prior mammograms of newly detected breast cancers with special focus on the time interval from initial imaging to detection. Eur J Radiol 2009;69(3):574-578.
16. 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(3):811-819.
17. 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(2):578-584.
18. van Dijck JA, Verbeek AL, Hendriks JH, Holland R. The current detectability of breast cancer in a mammographic screening program: a review of the previous mammograms of interval and screen-detected cancers. Cancer 1993;72(6): 1933-1938.
19. Majid AS, de Paredes ES, Doherty RD, Sharma NR, Salvador X. Missed breast carcinoma: pitfalls and pearls. RadioGraphics 2003;23(4):881-895.
20. Bird RE, Wallace TW, Yankaskas BC. Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography. Radiology 1992;184(3):613-617.
21. Morton MJ, Whaley DH, Brandt KR, Amrami KK. Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection-prospective evaluation. Radiology 2006;239(2):375-383.
22. Gromet M. Comparison of computer-aided detection to double reading of screening mammograms: review of 231,221 mammograms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2008;190(4): 854-859.
23. Dean JC, Ilvento CC. Improved cancer detection using computer-aided detection with diagnostic and screening mammography: prospective study of 104 cancers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187(1):20-28.
24. Blanks RG, Wallis MG, Moss SM. 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 1998;5(4):195-201.
25. Harvey SC, Geller B, Oppenheimer RG, Pinet M, Riddell L, Garra B. Increase in cancer detection and recall rates with independent double interpretation of screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2003; 180(5):1461-1467.
26. Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AA. Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 1994;191(1):241-244.
27. Karssemeijer N, Otten JD, Verbeek AL, et al. Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms. Radiology 2003;227(1): 192-200.
28. Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Collini G, et al. Computer-aided detection (CAD) of cancers detected on double reading by one reader only. Breast 2006;15(4):528-532.
29. Zheng B, Hardesty LA, Poller WR, Sumkin JH, Golla S. Mammography with computer-aided detection: reproducibility assessment-initial experience. Radiology 2003; 228(1):58-62.
30. Malich A, Azhari T, Böhm T, Fleck M, Kaiser W. Reproducibility: an important factor determining the quality of computer aided detection (CAD) systems. Eur J Radiol 2000; 36(3):170-174.
31. Baker JA, Lo JY, Delong DM, Floyd CE. Computer-aided detection in screening mammography: variability in cues. Radiology 2004;233(2):411-417.
32. Kim SJ, Moon WK, Cho N, Cha JH, Kim SM, Im J. Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: sensitivity and reproducibility in serial examinations. Radiology 2008;246(1):71-80.
33. Balleyguier C, Kinkel K, Fermanian J, et al. Computer-aided detection (CAD) in mammography: does it help the junior or the senior radiologist? Eur J Radiol 2005; 54(1):90 -96.
34. Skitka LJ. Does automation bias influence decision-making? Int J Hum Comput Stud 1999;51(5):991-1006.
35. Alberdi E, Povykalo A, Strigini L, Ayton P. Effects of incorrect computer-aided detection (CAD) output on human decision-making in mammography. Acad Radiol 2004; 11(8):909-918.
36. Zheng B, Ganott MA, Britton CA, et al. Soft-copy mammographic readings with different computer-assisted detection cuing environments: preliminary findings. Radiology 2001;221(3):633- 640.