Potential usefulness of similar images in the differential diagnosis of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms

Radiology

Volumn 253, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 625-631

  Nakayama, Ryohei ^a   Abe, Hiroyuki ^a   Shiraishi, Junji ^a   Doi, Kunio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CALCIFICATION; CLUSTERED MICROCALCIFICATION; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTITUTIONAL REVIEW; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MAMMOGRAPHY; OBSERVER VARIATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIOLOGIST; RANDOMIZATION; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; BREAST TUMOR; CALCINOSIS; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; COMPUTER ASSISTED DIAGNOSIS; MIDDLE AGED; RADIOGRAPHY;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; AREA UNDER CURVE; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CALCINOSIS; CLINICAL COMPETENCE; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; MAMMOGRAPHY; MIDDLE AGED; RADIOGRAPHIC IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; ROC CURVE;

EID: 73949146911     PISSN: 00338419     EISSN: 15271315     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2533090373     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Doi K. Current status and future potential of computer-aided diagnosis in medical imaging. Br J Radiol 2005;78:s3-s19.
2. Doi K. Computer-aided diagnosis in medical imaging: historical review, current status and future potential. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2007;31:198-211.
3. Kumazawa S, Muramatsu C, Li Q, et al. An investigation of radiologists' perception of lesion similarity: observations with paired breast masses on mammograms and paired lung nodules on CT images. Acad Radiol 2008;15:887-894.
4. Swett HA, Fisher PR, Cohn AI, Miller PL, Mutalik PG. Expert system-controlled image display. Radiology 1989;172:487-493.
5. Aisen AM, Broderick LS, Winer-Muram H, et al. Automated storage and retrieval of thin-section CT images to assist diagnosis: system description and preliminary assessment. Radiology 2003;228:265-270.
6. Li Q, Li F, Shiraishi J, Katsuragawa S, Sone S, Doi K. Investigation of new psychophysical measures for evaluation of similar images on thoracic computed tomography for distinction between benign and malignant nodules. Med Phys 2003;30:2584-2593.
7. Sklansky J, Tao EY, Bazargan M, Ornes CJ, Murchison RC, Teklehaimanot S. Computer-aided, case-based diagnosis of mammographic regions of interest containing microcalcifications. Acad Radiol 2000;7:395-405.
8. Swett HA, Mutalik PG, Neklesa VP, et al. Voice-activated retrieval of mammography reference images. J Digit Imaging 1998;11:65-73.
9. Qi H, Snyder WE. Content-based image retrieval in picture archiving and communications systems. J Digit Imaging 1999;12:81-83.
10. Giger ML, Huo Z, Vyborny CJ, et al. Intelligent CAD workstation for breast imaging using similarity to known lesions and multiple visual prompt aids. In: Sonka M, Fitzpatrick JM, eds. Proceedings of SPIE: medical imaging 2002 - image processing. Vol 4684. Bellingham, Wash: International Society for Optical Engineering, 2002; 768-773.
11. El-Naqa I, Yang Y, Galatsanos NP, Nishikawa RM, Wernick MN. A similarity learning approach to content-based image retrieval: application to digital mammography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2004;23:1233-1244.
12. Zheng B, Lu A, Hardesty LA, Sumkin JH, Hakim CM, Ganott MA, Gur D. A method to improve visual similarity of breast masses for an interactive computer-aided diagnosis environment. Med Phys 2006;33:111-117.
13. Horsch K, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, Lan L, Mendelson EB, Hendrick RE. Classification of breast lesions with multimodality computer-aided diagnosis: observer study results on an independent clinical data set. Radiology 2006;240:357-368.
14. Muramatsu C, Li Q, Suzuki K, et al. Investigation of psychophysical measure for evaluation of similar images for mammographic masses: preliminary results. Med Phys 2005;32:2295-2304.
15. Muramatsu C, Li Q, Schmidt R, et al. Experimental determination of subjective similarity for pairs of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms: observer study results. Med Phys 2006;33:3460-3468.
16. Muramatsu C, Li Q, Schmidt RA, et al. Determination of subjective similarity for pairs of masses and pairs of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms: comparison of similarity ranking scores and absolute similarity ratings. Med Phys 2007;34:2890-2895.
17. Muramatsu C, Li Q, Schmidt R, Shiraishi J, Doi K. Investigation of psychophysical similarity measures for selection of similar images in the diagnosis of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms. Med Phys 2008;35:5695-5702.
18. Muramatsu C. Investigation of similarity measures for selection of similar images in computer-aided diagnosis of breast lesions on mammograms [doctoral dissertation]. Chicago, Ill: University of Chicago, 2008.
19. Heath M, Bowyer K, Kopans D, Moore R, Kegelmeyer P Jr. Current status of the digital database for screening mammography. In: Digital mammography. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer, 1998.
20. Kobayashi T, Xu XW, MacMahon H, Metz CE, Doi K. Effect of a computer-aided diagnosis scheme on radiologists' performance in detection of lung nodules on radiographs. Radiology 1996;199:843-848.
21. Uozumi T, Nakamura K, Watanabe H, Nakata H, Katsuragawa S, Doi K. ROC analysis of detection of metastatic pulmonary nodules on digital chest radiographs with temporal subtraction. Acad Radiol 2001;8:871-878.
22. Dorfman DD, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Receiver operating characteristic rating analysis: generalization to the population of readers and patients with the jackknife method. Invest Radiol 1992;27:723-731.
23. Hillis SL, Berbaum KS, Metz CE. Recent developments in the Dorfman-Berbaum-Metz procedure for multireader ROC study analysis. Acad Radiol 2008;15:647-661.