Top

Published in:

01-07-2006 | Breast

CAD for mammography: the technique, results, current role and further developments

Authors: Ansgar Malich, Dorothee R. Fischer, Joachim Böttcher

Published in: European Radiology | Issue 7/2006

Abstract

CAD systems, developed to assist the radiologist in the detection of suspicious lesions on mammograms, are currently controversially discussed. The highly sensitive detection of malignant structures including priors by CAD is linked with a low specific performance and a high rate of falsely positive markings. This causes controversial results regarding the effect of CAD systems for the diagnosing radiologist. This review aims to give an overview of the current literature, to state the currently discussed controversial results of CAD and to give an outlook on the next developments, which are not limited to senology, but include many other applications of CAD systems in radiology.

Krebsatlas der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (1998) 3. Auflage Becker N, Wahrendorf J. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York

Alexander FE, Anderson TJ, Brown HK et al (1994) The Edinburgh randomised trial of breast cancer screening. Results after 10 years of follow - up. Br J Cancer 70:542–548PubMed

Andersson I, Aspegren K, Janzon L et al (1988) Mammographic screening and mortality from breast cancer. The Malmoe mammographic screening trail. BMJ 297:943–948PubMedCrossRef

Larsson LG, Andersson I, Bjurstam N et al (1997) Updated overview of the Swedish randomized trials on breast cancer screening with mammography. Age group 40–49 at randomization. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 22:57–61PubMed

Mushlin AI, Kouides RW, Shapiro DE (1998) Estimating the accuracy of screening mammography. A meta-analysis. Am J Prev Med 14:143–153CrossRefPubMed

Poplack SP, Tosteson AN, Grove MR, Wells WA, Carney PA (2000) Mammography in 53,803 women from New Hampshire mammopraphy network. Radiology 217:832–840PubMed

Zonderland HM, Coerkamp EG, Hermans J, van de VijverMJ, van Voorthuisen ADE (1999) Diagnosis of breast cancer. Contribution of US as an adjunct to mammography. Radiology 213:413–422PubMed

Blanks RG, Moss SM, McGahan CE, Quinn MJ, Babb PJ (2000) Effect of NHS breast screening programme on mortality from breast cancer in England and Wales, 1990–1998: comparison of observed with predicted mortality. BMJ 321:665–669CrossRefPubMed

Tayler P (2002) Computer aids for detection and diagnosis in mammography. Imaging 14:472–477

10.

Bird RE (1990) Professional quality assurance for mammography screening programs. Radiology 177:8–10

11.

Chan HP, Doi K, Vyborny CJ et al (1990) Improvement in radiologists detection of clustered microcalcifications on mammograms: the potential of computer-aided diagnosis. Invest Radiol 25:1102–1110PubMedCrossRef

12.

Zheng B, Chang YH, Staiger M, Good W, Gur D (1995) Computer-aided detection of clustered microcalcifications in digitized mammograms. Acad Radiol 2:655–662CrossRefPubMed

13.

Chan HP, Sahiner B, Helvie MA et al (1999) Improvement of radiologist’s characterization of mammographic masses by using computer-aided diagnosis: an ROC-study. Radiology 212:817–827PubMed

14.

Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AAS (1994) Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology 191:241–244PubMed

15.

Fields S (1998) UK radiologist workforce survey-breast imaging service. Royal College of Radiologists Newsletter 54:12–14

16.

Winsberg F, Elkin M, Macy J, Bordaz V, Weymouth W (1967) Detection of radiographic abnormalities in mammograms by means of optical scanning and computer analysis. Radiology 89:211–215

17.

Taylor P, Champness J, Given-Wilson R, Johnston K, Potts H (2005) Impact of computer-aided detection prompts on the sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography. Health Technology Assessment 9:1–58PubMed

18.

Astley SM, Gilbert FJ (2004) Computer-aided detection in mammography. Clin Radiol 59:390–399CrossRefPubMed

19.

URL:http://www.cadxmed.com

20.

Image Checker M 1000 System, Draft Document. 12.11.1997:1–35

21.

Malich A, Boettcher J, Pfeil A et al (2003) Comparison of bone mineralization parameters calculated using double energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) vs. digital X-ray radiogrammetry (DXR) on patients with rheumatoid arthritis. IJR 3:http://www.ispub.com/ostia/index.php?xmlFilePath=journals/ijra/vol3n1/bone.xml

22.

Acar B, Beaulieu CF, Paik DS, Yee J, Jeffrey RB, Napel SS (2002) 3D differential descriptors for improved computer aided detection (CAD) of colonic polyps in computed tomography colonography (CTC). Radiology 255(S):405

23.

Helvie MA, Hadjiiski L, Makariou E et al (2004) Sensitivity of noncommercial computer-aided detection system for mammographic breast cancer detection: pilot clinical trial. Radiology 231:208–214PubMedCrossRef

24.

Petrick N, Sahiner B, Chan HP, Helvie MA, Paquerault S, Hadjiiski LM (2002) Breast cancer detection: evaluation of a mass detection algorithm for computer-aided diagnosis-experience in 263 patients. Radiology 224:217–224PubMedCrossRef

25.

Malich A, Marx C, Facius M, Boehm T, Fleck M, Kaiser WA (2001) Tumor detection rate of a new commercially available computer-aided detection system. Eur Radiol 12:2454–2459CrossRef

26.

Funovics M, Schamp S, Lackner B, Wunderbaldinger P, Lechner G, Wolf G (1998) Computerassistierte diagnose in der mammographie: das R2 imagechecker-system in der detektion spikulierter läsionen. Wien Med Wschr 148:321–324PubMed

27.

Jiang Y, Nishikawa RM, Schmidt RA, Metz CE, Doi K (1999) Comparison of Independent double reading and computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for the diagnosis of breast lesions. Radiology 213(S):323

28.

Thurfjell E, Thurfjell G, Egge E, Bjurstam N (1998) Sensitivity and specificity of computer-assisted breast cancer detection in mammography screening. Acta Radiol 39:384–388PubMedCrossRef

29.

Chang YH, Zheng B, Gur D (1997) Computer-aided detection of clustered microcalcifications on digitized mammograms: a robustness experiment. Acad Radiol 4:415–418CrossRefPubMed

30.

Ibrahim N, Fujita H, Hara T, Endo T (1997) Automated detection of clustered MC on mammograms. CAD system application to MIAS database. Phys Med Biol 42:2577–2589CrossRefPubMed

31.

Chang YH, Zheng B, Gur D (1996) Robustness of computerized identification of MA in digitized mammograms. A preliminary assessment. Invest Radiol 31:563–568CrossRefPubMed

32.

Nishikawa RM, Giger ML, Doi K et al (1994) Effect of case selection on the performance of computer-aided detection schemes. Med Phys 21:265–269CrossRefPubMed

33.

Veldkamp WJ, Karssmeijer N (1998) Accurate segmentation and contrast measurement of microcalcifications in mammograms: a phantom study. Med Phys 25:1102–1110CrossRefPubMed

34.

Sittek H, Perlet C, Helmberger R, Linsmeier E, Kessler M, Reiser M (1998) Computer assistierte analyse von mammographien in der klinischen routinediagnostik. Radiologe 38:848–852CrossRefPubMed

35.

Warren Burhenne LJ, Wood SA, D’Orsi CJ, Feig SA, Kopans DB, O’Shaughnessy KF et al (2000) Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology 215:554–562PubMed

36.

Butler SA, Gabbay RJ, Kass DA, Siedler DE, O’Shaughnessy KF, Castellino RA (2004) Computer-aided detection in diagnostic mammography: detection of clinically unsuspected cancers. AJR Am J Roentgenol 183:1155–1511

37.

Malich A (2006) Is there a diagnostic input of CAD in the detection of initially overseen or not detectable breast cancer lesions at mammograms? Presented ECR 2006

38.

Malich A, Marx C, Facius M, Wurdinger S, Pfleiderer SO, Freesmeyer MG, Kaiser WA (2004) Value of computer-aided detection (CAD) of breast cancers on mammograms, which were not detected by radiologists. ECR 2004: Eur Radiol 14(S2):235

39.

Marx C, Schütze B, Fleck M, O’Shaughnessy K, Kaiser WA (1998) Computer-aided diagnosis - help to detect breast cancer earlier? A retrospective analysis of 58 casa with previous mammograms. 10th International Congress on Senology, 31 May-4 June 1998, Porto, Portugal. Breast J 4(S):39

40.

Blanks RG, Wallis MG, Given-Wilson RM (1999) Observer variability in cancer detection during routine repeat (incident) mammographic screening in a study of two versus one view mammography. J Med Screen 6:152–158PubMed

41.

Marx C, Malich A, Grebenstein U, Kaiser WA (2004) Are unnecessary follow-up procedures induced by computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) in mammography? Comparison of mammographic diagnosis with and without use of CAD. Eur J Radiol 51:66–72CrossRefPubMed

42.

Moberg K, Bjurstam N, Wilczek B, Rostgard L, Egge E, Muren C (2001) Computed assisted detection of interval cancers. Eur J Radiol 39:104–110CrossRefPubMed

43.

Brem RF, Schoonjans JM (2001) Radiologist detection of microcalcifications with and without computer aided detection: a comparative study. Clin Radiol 56:150–154CrossRefPubMed

44.

Malich A (2006) The role of CAD as a primer diagnostic tool and as an assisting aid for radiologists tested on an official mammography test collection. Presented ECR 2006

45.

Freer TW, Ulissey MJ (2001) Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology 220:781–786PubMedCrossRef

46.

Morton M, Whaley D, Brandt K, Amrami K (2002) The effects of computer-aided detection (CAD) on a local/regional screening mammography program: prospective evaluation of 12,646 patients . RSNA 2002. Radiology 225:459

47.

Alberdi E, Povykalo A, Strigini L, Ayton P (2004) Effects of incorrect computer-aided detection (CAD) output on human decision-making in mammography. Acad Radiol 11:909–918CrossRefPubMed

48.

Yankaskas BC, Cleveland RJ, Schell MJ, Kozar R (2001) Association of recall rates with sensitivity and positive predictive values of screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 177:543–549PubMed

49.

Haiaert D, Henderson J (1991) A comparison of interpretation of screening mammograms by a radiographer, a doctor and a radiologist: results and implications. Br J Clin Practise 45:43–45

50.

Pauli R, Hammond S, Ansell J (1996) Comparison of radiographer/radiologist double film reading with single reading in breast cancer screening. J Med Screen 3:18–22PubMed

51.

Balleyguier C, Kinkel K, Fermanian J et al (2005) Computer-aided detection (CAD) in mammography: does it help the junior of the senior radiologist? Eur J Radiol 54:90–96CrossRefPubMed

52.

53.

Malich A, Freesmeyer MG, Petrovitch A et al (2004) Clinical impact of an improved mammographic computer-aided detection (CAD) system in the detection of breast masses. ECR 2004. Eur Radiol 14(S2):328

54.

Ehrenstein T, Kenzel PP, Hadijuana J et al (2000) Computer assisted diagnosis in mammography: evaluation of an expert system. Eur Radiol 10(S1):117

55.

Gavrielides MA, Lo JY, Vargas-Voracek R, Floyd CE Jr (2000) Segmentation of suspicious clustered microcalcifications in mammograms. Med Phys 27:13–22CrossRefPubMed

56.

Malich A, Vogel D, Facius M et al (2003) Evaluation einer möglichen erweiterten Anwendungsoption eines CAD-Systems als primäres Diagnostikum zum Ausschluß maligner Mikrokalzifikationen. Roefo Fortsch Geb Rontgenstr Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr 175:1225–1231CrossRef

57.

Pamilo MS, Raulisto L, Dean PB (2003) An evaluation of computer-assisted detection (CAD) performance on screen-detected breast cancers. RSNA 2003. Radiology 229–690

58.

Zheng Y, Zhang L, Clark RA (2001) False-positive reduction in CAD mass detection using a competitive classification strategy. Med Phys 28:250–258CrossRefPubMed

59.

Young W, Destounis S, Bonaccio E, Zuley M (2002) Computer-aided detection in screening mammography: can it replace the second reader in an independent double read? Preliminary results of a prospective double blinded study. RSNA 2002. Radiology 225:600

60.

Destounis SV, Di Nitto P, Logan-Young W, Bonaccio E, Zuley ML, Willison KM (2004) Can computer aided detection with double reading of screening mammograms help decrease the false negative rate? Initial experience. Radiology 232:578–584PubMedCrossRef

61.

Ciatto S, Rosselli Del Turco M, Burke P, Visioli C, Paci E, Zappa M (2003) Comparison of standard and double reading and computer-aided detection (CAD) of interval cancers at prior negative screening mammograms: blind review. Br J Cancer 89:1645–1649CrossRefPubMed

62.

Nelson MT, Lechner MCL (2002) Comparison of three commercially available FDA approved computer aided detection (CAD) systems. RSNA 2002. Radiology 225:600

63.

Oda T, Kubo M, Kawata Y, Niki N, Nakimura R, Morijama N (2002) A computer-aided diagnosis system for lung cancer. Radiology 255(S):750

64.

Goodman DN, Boutross-Tadross O, Jong RA (1995) Mammographic features of pure mucinous carcinoma of the breast with pathological correlation. Can Assoc Radiol J 46:296–301PubMed

65.

Sheppard DG, Whitman GJ, Huynh PT, Sahin AA, Fornage BD, Stelling CB (2000) Tubular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic and sonographic features. AJR Am J Roentgenol 174:253–257PubMed

66.

Tabar L, Dean PB (2002) Lehratlas der Mammographie, 2. Aufl. Thieme Verlag Stuttgart, New York

67.

Malich A, Sauner D, Marx C et al (2003) Influence of size and histology on tumour detection rate of a computer-aided detection (CAD)-system. Radiology 228:851–856PubMedCrossRef

68.

Brem RF, Schoonjans JM, Goodman SN, Nolten A, Askin FB, Gatewood OM (2001) Nonpalpable breast cancer: percutaneous diagnosis with 11- and 8-gauge stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy devices. Radiology 219:793–796PubMed

69.

Malich A, Fischer D, Hansch A, Marx C, Freesmeyer MG, Kaiser WA (2005) Influence of mammographical density (according to ACR-criteria) on tumour detection using computer-assisted detection (CAD-) systems. J Digit Imaging 16: Epub ahead of print (PMID:15827823)

70.

Ho WT, Lam PW (2003) Clinical performance of computer-aided detection in digital mammography. Clin Radiol 58:133–136CrossRefPubMed

71.

Brem RF, Hoffmeister JW, Rapelyea JA et al (2005) Impact of breast density on computer-aided detection for breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 184:439–444PubMed

72.

http://www.r2tech.com/prf/prf001.html#3

73.

iCAD device labelling, 2003 (Food and Drug Administration device)

74.

Malich A, Azhari T, Boehm T, Fleck M, Kaiser W (2000) Reproducibility: an important factor determining the quality of computer aided detection (CAD) systems. Eur J Radiol 36:170–174CrossRefPubMed

75.

Baker JA, Lo JY, Delong DM, Floyd CE (2004) Computer-aided detection in screening mammography: variability in cues. Radiology 233:411–417PubMedCrossRef

76.

Zheng B, Hardesty L, Poller W, Sumkin J, Golla S (2003) Mammography with computer-aided detection: reproducibility assessment-initial experience. Radiology 228:58–62PubMedCrossRef

77.

Zheng B, Gur D, Good WF, Hardesty LA (2004) A method to test the reproducibility and to improve performance of computer-aided detection schemes for digitised mammograms. Med Phys 31:2964–2972CrossRefPubMed

78.

Baker JA, Rosen EL, Lo JY, Gimenez EI, Walsh R, Soo MS (2003) Computer-aided detection (CAD) in screening mammography: sensitivity of commercial CAD systems for detecting architectural distortion. AJR Am J Roentgenol 181:1083–1088PubMed

79.

Chen W, Giger ML, Newstead GM, Bick U (2004) Computerized analysis of contrast-enhanced MR images of the breast: automated bias field correction and identification of characteristic signal-time curves. RSNA 2004. Radiology 233(S):448

80.

Wismueller A, Leinsinger G, Meyer-Baese A, Wiegard R, Lange O, Reiser M (2004) Computer-aided diagnosis in dynamic breast MRI: can machine learning by neural networks improve the diagnostic accuracy in suspicious lesions? RSNA 2004. Radiology 233 (S):449

81.

Drukker K, Giger ML (2004) Robustness of a computerized lesion detection and classifiction scheme for breast ultrasound across acquisition platforms. RSNA 2004. Radiology 233 (S):447

82.

Helvie MA, Kapur A, Rondot P, Roubidoux MA, Goodsitt MM (2004) Combined digital mammography/automated 3D whole breast ultrasound system for breast imaging: patient acceptance of prototype scanning system. RSNA 2004. Radiology 233(S):654

83.

Pietka E, Pospiech-Kurkowa P, Gertych A, Cao F, Huang HK (2002) Computer-assisted bone age assessment: image analysis and fuzzy clarification. Radiology 225(S):751

84.

Malich A, Freesmeyer MG, Mentzel HJ et al (2003) Normative values of bone parameters of children and adolescents using digital computer-assisted radiogrammetry (DXR). J Clin Densitom 6:103–112CrossRefPubMed

85.

Malich A, Boettcher J, Pfeil A et al (2004) Impact of technical conditions of X-ray imaging on reproducibility and precision of digital computer-assisted X-ray radiogrammetry (DXR). Skeletal Radiol 33:698–703CrossRefPubMed

86.

Boettcher J, Malich A, Pfeil A et al (2004) Digital X-ray radiogrammetry (DXR) as a new method for measurement of bone mineral density in patients suffering from rheumatoid arthritis. Eur Radiol 14:631–637CrossRefPubMed

87.

Jorgensen JT, Andersen PB, Rosholm A, Bjarnason NH (2000) Digital X-ray radiogrammetry: a new appendicular bone densitometric method with high precision. Clin Physiol 20:330–335CrossRefPubMed

88.

Bouxsein ML, Palermo L, Yeung C, Black DM (2002) Digital X-ray radiogrammetry predicts hip, wrist and vertebral fracture in elderly women: a prospective analysis from the study of osteoporotic fractures. Osteoporos Int 13:358–365CrossRefPubMed

89.

Hyldstrup L, Jorgensen JT, Sorensen TK, Baeksgaard L (2001) Response of cortical bone to antiresorptive treatment. Calcif Tissue Int 68:135–139CrossRefPubMed

Title: CAD for mammography: the technique, results, current role and further developments
Authors: Ansgar Malich
Dorothee R. Fischer
Joachim Böttcher
Publication date: 01-07-2006
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: European Radiology / Issue 7/2006
Print ISSN: 0938-7994
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1084
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-005-0089-x

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

CAD for mammography: the technique, results, current role and further developments

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 7/2006

Contemporary issues in the diagnosis of prostate cancer for the radiologist

MRI features of tibiofibular joint dislocation

Recognition awards at ECR 2006

Comparison of contrast-enhanced ultrasonography versus baseline ultrasound and contrast-enhanced computed tomography in metastatic disease of the liver: diagnostic performance and confidence

Direct detector radiography versus dual reading computed radiography: feasibility of dose reduction in chest radiography

Impact of European Federation of Societies for Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology (EFSUMB) guidelines on the use of contrast agents in liver ultrasound