Lexicon for standardized interpretation of gamma camera molecular breast imaging: Observer agreement and diagnostic accuracy

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging

Volumn 39, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 971-982

  Conners, Amy Lynn ^a   Hruska, Carrie B ^a   Tortorelli, Cindy L ^a   Maxwell, Robert W ^a   Rhodes, Deborah J ^a   Boughey, Judy C ^a   Berg, Wendie A ^b  

^a MAYO CLINIC   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

Author keywords

Gamma camera; Lexicon; Molecular breast imaging; Observer agreement; Scintimammography; Training

Indexed keywords

BOOK; CLINICAL ARTICLE; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MEDICAL EDUCATION; MOLECULAR BREAST IMAGING; MOLECULAR IMAGING; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PREDICTIVE VALUE; RADIOLOGIST; REVIEW; SCINTILLATION CAMERA; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STANDARDIZATION;

BREAST; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMAGE INTERPRETATION, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; MAMMOGRAPHY; MOLECULAR IMAGING; OBSERVER VARIATION; RADIONUCLIDE IMAGING; REFERENCE STANDARDS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC;

EID: 84862659019     PISSN: 16197070     EISSN: 16197089     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00259-011-2054-z     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. DJ Rhodes CB Hruska SW Phillips DH Whaley MK O'Connor 2011 Dedicated dual-head gamma imaging for breast cancer screening in women with mammographically dense breasts Radiology 258 106 118 21045179 10.1148/radiol.10100625
2. CB Hruska SW Phillips DH Whaley DJ Rhodes MK O'Connor 2008 Molecular breast imaging: use of a dual-head dedicated gamma camera to detect small breast tumors AJR Am J Roentgenol 191 1805 1815 19020253 10.2214/AJR.07.3693
3. ES Burnside EA Sickles LW Bassett DL Rubin CH Lee DM Ikeda, et al. 2009 The ACR BI-RADS experience: learning from history J Am Coll Radiol 6 851 860 19945040 10.1016/j.jacr.2009.07.023
4. D'Orsi CJ, Bassett LW, Berg WA, et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS: mammography. 4th ed. Reston: American College of Radiology; 2003.
5. WA Berg CJ D'Orsi VP Jackson LW Bassett CA Beam RS Lewis, et al. 2002 Does training in the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) improve biopsy recommendations or feature analysis agreement with experienced breast imagers at mammography? Radiology 224 871 880 12202727 10.1148/radiol.2243011626
6. Mendelson EB, Baum JK, Berg WA, Merritt CRB, Rubin E. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS: ultrasound. 1st ed. Reston: American College of Radiology; 2003.
7. Ikeda DM, Hylton NM, Kuhl CK, et al. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System, BI-RADS: magnetic resonance imaging. Reston: American College of Radiology; 2003.
8. D Narayanan KS Madsen JE Kalinyak WA Berg 2011 Interpretation of positron emission mammography and MRI by experienced breast imaging radiologists: performance and observer reproducibility AJR Am J Roentgenol 196 971 981 21427351 10.2214/AJR.10.5081
9. AL Weinmann CB Hruska MK O'Connor 2009 Design of optimal collimation for dedicated molecular breast imaging systems Med Phys 36 845 856 19378745 10.1118/1.3077119 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1MXisFemu7g%3D
10. JC Boughey MK O'Connor CB Hruska L Neal JW Jakub AC Degnim, et al. 2010 Molecular breast imaging in the preoperative surgical workup of women with biopsy proven breast cancer (abstract) Ann Surg Oncol 17 S49
11. DJ Rhodes CB Hruska CL Tortorelli RW Maxwell AL Conners MK O'Connor 2011 Low-dose molecular breast imaging with Tc-99 m sestamibi for screening in women with dense breasts (abstract) J Nucl Med 52 671
12. PE Crewson 2005 Reader agreement studies AJR Am J Roentgenol 184 1391 1397 15855085
13. Fleiss JL, Levin BA, Paik MC. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 3rd ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2003.
14. JR Landis GG Koch 1977 The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data Biometrics 33 159 174 843571 10.2307/2529310 1:STN:280:DyaE2s7jsFWqtA%3D%3D
15. WA Berg C Campassi P Langenberg MJ Sexton 2000 Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: inter- and intraobserver variability in feature analysis and final assessment AJR Am J Roentgenol 174 1769 1777 10845521 1:STN:280: DC%2BD3czgt1Wgsw%3D%3D
16. N Abdullah B Mesurolle M El-Khoury E Kao 2009 Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System lexicon for US: interobserver agreement for assessment of breast masses Radiology 252 665 672 19567644 10.1148/radiol.2523080670
17. E Lazarus MB Mainiero B Schepps SL Koelliker LS Livingston 2006 BI-RADS lexicon for US and mammography: interobserver variability and positive predictive value Radiology 239 385 391 16569780 10.1148/radiol.2392042127
18. HJ Lee EK Kim MJ Kim JH Youk JY Lee DR Kang, et al. 2008 Observer variability of Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) for breast ultrasound Eur J Radiol 65 293 298 17531417 10.1016/j.ejrad.2007.04.008
19. DM Ikeda NM Hylton K Kinkel MG Hochman CK Kuhl WA Kaiser, et al. 2001 Development, standardization, and testing of a lexicon for reporting contrast-enhanced breast magnetic resonance imaging studies J Magn Reson Imaging 13 889 895 11382949 10.1002/jmri.1127 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3M3pvFeisA%3D%3D
20. MJ Stoutjesdijk JJ Futterer C Boetes LE van Die G Jager JO Barentsz 2005 Variability in the description of morphologic and contrast enhancement characteristics of breast lesions on magnetic resonance imaging Invest Radiol 40 355 362 15905722 10.1097/01.rli.0000163741.16718.3e
21. JA Baker PJ Kornguth CE Floyd Jr 1996 Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System standardized mammography lexicon: observer variability in lesion description AJR Am J Roentgenol 166 773 778 8610547 1:STN:280: DyaK287pvV2ksg%3D%3D
22. EA Sickles 1991 Periodic mammographic follow-up of probably benign lesions: results in 3,184 consecutive cases Radiology 179 463 468 2014293 1:STN:280:DyaK3M7psFGhsg%3D%3D
23. X Varas JH Leborgne F Leborgne J Mezzera S Jaumandreu 2002 Revisiting the mammographic follow-up of BI-RADS category 3 lesions AJR Am J Roentgenol 179 691 695 12185047
24. I Vizcaino L Gadea L Andreo D Salas F Ruiz-Perales D Cuevas, et al. 2001 Short-term follow-up results in 795 nonpalpable probably benign lesions detected at screening mammography Radiology 219 475 483 11323475 1:STN:280: DC%2BD3M3mt1eitg%3D%3D
25. O Graf TH Helbich G Hopf C Graf EA Sickles 2007 Probably benign breast masses at US: is follow-up an acceptable alternative to biopsy? Radiology 244 87 93 17581897 10.1148/radiol.2441060258
26. MB Mainiero A Goldkamp E Lazarus L Livingston SL Koelliker B Schepps, et al. 2005 Characterization of breast masses with sonography: can biopsy of some solid masses be deferred? J Ultrasound Med 24 161 167 15661946
27. S Raza SA Chikarmane SS Neilsen LM Zorn RL Birdwell 2008 BI-RADS 3, 4, and 5 lesions: value of US in management - follow-up and outcome Radiology 248 773 781 18647850 10.1148/radiol.2483071786
28. PR Eby WB DeMartini RL Gutierrez MH Saini S Peacock CD Lehman 2009 Characteristics of probably benign breast MRI lesions AJR Am J Roentgenol 193 861 867 19696303 10.2214/AJR.08.2096
29. L Liberman EA Morris CL Benton AF Abramson DD Dershaw 2003 Probably benign lesions at breast magnetic resonance imaging: preliminary experience in high-risk women Cancer 98 377 388 12872360 10.1002/cncr.11491
30. SJ Goldsmith W Parsons MJ Guiberteau LH Stern L Lanzkowsky J Weigert, et al. 2010 SNM practice guideline for breast scintigraphy with breast-specific gamma-cameras 1.0 J Nucl Med Technol 38 219 224 21057112 10.2967/jnmt.110.082271
31. Hruska CB, O'Connor MK. Quantitation of malignant and benign breast lesions with dual-head molecular breast imaging (abstract). Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) Annual Meeting. Chicago, IL; December 3, 2010.
32. CB Hruska MK O'Connor 2008 Quantification of lesion size, depth, and uptake using a dual-head molecular breast imaging system Med Phys 35 1365 1376 10.1118/1.2885371 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXktlGksLo%3D
33. D Gur AI Bandos CS Cohen CM Hakim LA Hardesty MA Ganott, et al. 2008 The "laboratory" effect: comparing radiologists' performance and variability during prospective clinical and laboratory mammography interpretations Radiology 249 47 53 18682584 10.1148/radiol.2491072025
34. CM Rutter S Taplin 2000 Assessing mammographers' accuracy. A comparison of clinical and test performance J Clin Epidemiol 53 443 450 10812315 10.1016/S0895-4356(99)00218-8 1:STN:280:DC%2BD3c3nsVShtQ%3D%3D