Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Journal of Digital Imaging 3/2005

01-09-2005

Effect of Breast Density on Computer Aided Detection

Authors: Ansgar Malich, M.D., Dorothee R. Fischer, M.D., Mirjam Facius, M.D., Alexander Petrovitch, M.D., Joachim Boettcher, M.D., Christiane Marx, M.D., Andreas Hansch, M.D., Werner A. Kaiser, M.D.

Published in: Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine | Issue 3/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose: This study was conducted to assess the clinical impact of breast density and density of the lesion’s background on the performance of a computer-aided detection (CAD) system in the detection of breast masses (MA) and microcalcifications (MC). Materials and Methods: A total of 200 screening mammograms interpreted as BI-RADS 1 and suspicious mammograms of 150 patients having a histologically verified malignancy from 1992 to 2000 were selected by using a sampler of tumor cases. Excluding those cases having more than one lesion or a contralateral malignancy attributable to statistical reasons, 127 cases with 127 malignant findings were analyzed with a CAD system (Second Look 5.0, CADx Systems, Inc., Beavercreek, OH). Of the 127 malignant lesions, 56 presented as MC and 101 presented as MA, including 30 cases with both malignant signs. Overall breast density of the mammogram and density of the lesion’s background were determined by two observers in congruence (density a: entirely fatty, density b: scattered fibroglandular tissue, density c: heterogeneously dense, density d: extremely dense). Results: Within the unsuspicious group, 100/200 cases did not have any CAD MA marks and were therefore truly negative (specificity 50%), and 151/200 cases did not have any CAD MC marks (specificity 75.5%). For these 200 cases, the numbers of marks per image were 0.41 and 0.37 (density a), 0.38 and 0.97 (density b), 0.44 and 0.91 (density c), and 0.58 and 0.68 (density d) for MC and MA marks, respectively (Fisher’s t-test: n.s. for MC, p < 0.05 for MA). Malignant lesions were correctly detected in at least one view by the CAD system for 52/56 (92.8%) MC and 91/101 (90.1%) MA. Detection rate versus breast density was: 4/6 (66.7%) and 18/19 (94.7%) (density a), 32/33 (97.0%) and 49/51 (96.1%) (density b), 14/15 (93.3%) and 23/28 (82.1%) (density c), and 2/2 (100%) and 1/3 (33.3%) (density d) for MC and MA, respectively. Detection rate versus the lesion’s background was: 19/21 (90.5%) and 36/38 (94.7%) (density a), 34/36 (94.4%) and 59/62 (95.2%) (density b), 8/9 (88.9%) and 20/24 (83.3%) (density c), and 9/10 (90%) and 4/8 (50%) (density d) for groups 2 and 3, respectively. Detection rates differed significantly for masses in heterogeneously dense and extremely dense tissue (overall or lesion’s background) versus all other densities (Fisher’s t-test: p < 0.05). A significantly lowered FP rate for masses was found on mammograms of entirely fatty tissue. Conclusion: Overall breast density and density at a lesion’s background do not appear to have a significant effect on CAD sensitivity or specificity for MC. CAD sensitivity for MA may be lowered in cases with heterogeneously and extremely dense breasts, and CAD specificity for MA is highest in cases with extremely fatty breasts. The effects of overall breast density and density of a lesion’s background appear to be similar.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bird, RE 1990Professional quality assurance for mammography screening programsRadiology177810 Bird, RE 1990Professional quality assurance for mammography screening programsRadiology177810
2.
go back to reference Chan, HP, Doi, K, Vyborny, CJ, et al. 1990Improvement in radiologists detection of clustered MC on mammograms: the potential of computer-aided diagnosisInvest Radiol2511021110PubMed Chan, HP, Doi, K, Vyborny, CJ,  et al. 1990Improvement in radiologists detection of clustered MC on mammograms: the potential of computer-aided diagnosisInvest Radiol2511021110PubMed
3.
go back to reference Zheng, B, Chang, YH, Staiger, M, Good, W, Gur, D 1995Computer-aided detection of clustered MC in digitized mammogramsAcad Radiol2655662PubMed Zheng, B, Chang, YH, Staiger, M, Good, W, Gur, D 1995Computer-aided detection of clustered MC in digitized mammogramsAcad Radiol2655662PubMed
4.
go back to reference Chan, HP, Sahiner, B, Helvie, MA, et al. 1999Improvement of radiologist’s characterization of mammographic MA by using computer-aided diagnosis: an ROC-studyRadiology212817827PubMed Chan, HP, Sahiner, B, Helvie, MA,  et al. 1999Improvement of radiologist’s characterization of mammographic MA by using computer-aided diagnosis: an ROC-studyRadiology212817827PubMed
5.
go back to reference Thurfjell, EL, Lernevall, KA, Taube, AAS 1994Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening programRadiology191241244PubMed Thurfjell, EL, Lernevall, KA, Taube, AAS 1994Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening programRadiology191241244PubMed
6.
go back to reference Karssemeijer, N, Hendriks, JH 1997Computer-assisted reading of mammogramsEur Radiol7743748PubMed Karssemeijer, N, Hendriks, JH 1997Computer-assisted reading of mammogramsEur Radiol7743748PubMed
7.
go back to reference Ciatto, S, Brancato, B, Turco, RM, et al. 2003Comparison of standard reading and computer aided diagnosis (CAD) on a proficiency test of screening mammographyRadiol Med (Torino)1065965 Ciatto, S, Brancato, B, Turco, RM,  et al. 2003Comparison of standard reading and computer aided diagnosis (CAD) on a proficiency test of screening mammographyRadiol Med (Torino)1065965
8.
go back to reference Feig, SA 2002Breast cancer screening: potential role of computer-aided detection (CAD)Technol Cancer Res Treat1127131PubMed Feig, SA 2002Breast cancer screening: potential role of computer-aided detection (CAD)Technol Cancer Res Treat1127131PubMed
9.
go back to reference Pamilo M, Raulisto L, Dean P: An evaluation of computer-assisted detection (CAD) performance on screen detected breast cancers. 89th Assembly of the Radiological Society of Northern America 2003, RSNA 2003. Radiology Suppl. 1:690, 2003 Pamilo M, Raulisto L, Dean P: An evaluation of computer-assisted detection (CAD) performance on screen detected breast cancers. 89th Assembly of the Radiological Society of Northern America 2003, RSNA 2003. Radiology Suppl. 1:690, 2003
10.
go back to reference Winsberg, F, Elkin, M, Macy, J, Bordaz, V, Weymouth, W 1967Detection of radiographic abnormalities in mammograms by means of optical scanning and computer analysisRadiology89211215 Winsberg, F, Elkin, M, Macy, J, Bordaz, V, Weymouth, W 1967Detection of radiographic abnormalities in mammograms by means of optical scanning and computer analysisRadiology89211215
11.
go back to reference Funovics, M, Schamp, S, Lackner, B, Wunderbaldinger, P, Lechner, G, Wolf, G 1998Computerassistierte Diagnose in der Mammographie: das R2 ImageChecker-System in der Detektion spikulierter LäsionenWien Med Wochenschr148321324PubMed Funovics, M, Schamp, S, Lackner, B, Wunderbaldinger, P, Lechner, G, Wolf, G 1998Computerassistierte Diagnose in der Mammographie: das R2 ImageChecker-System in der Detektion spikulierter LäsionenWien Med Wochenschr148321324PubMed
12.
go back to reference Malich, A, Vogel, D, Facius, M, et al. 2003Evaluation einer möglichen erweiterten Anwendungsoption eines CAD-Systems als primäres Diagnostikum zum Ausschluß maligner MikrokalzifikationenRofo, Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr17512251231 Malich, A, Vogel, D, Facius, M,  et al. 2003Evaluation einer möglichen erweiterten Anwendungsoption eines CAD-Systems als primäres Diagnostikum zum Ausschluß maligner MikrokalzifikationenRofo, Fortschr Geb Rontgenstrahlen Neuen Bildgeb Verfahr17512251231
13.
go back to reference Quek, ST, Thng, CH, Khoo, JB, Koh, WL 2003Radiologists’ detection of mammographic abnormalities with and without a computer-aided detection systemAustralas Radiol47257260CrossRefPubMed Quek, ST, Thng, CH, Khoo, JB, Koh, WL 2003Radiologists’ detection of mammographic abnormalities with and without a computer-aided detection systemAustralas Radiol47257260CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Malich, A, Marx, C, Facius, M, Boehm, T, Fleck, M, Kaiser, WA 2001Tumour detection rate of a new commercially available computer-aided detection (CAD) systemEur Radiol1224542459CrossRef Malich, A, Marx, C, Facius, M, Boehm, T, Fleck, M, Kaiser, WA 2001Tumour detection rate of a new commercially available computer-aided detection (CAD) systemEur Radiol1224542459CrossRef
15.
go back to reference Marx, C, Malich, A, Facius, M, et al. 2004Comparison of mammographically based diagnosis with and without using of CAD using a double-blinded protocolEur J Radiol516672CrossRefPubMed Marx, C, Malich, A, Facius, M,  et al. 2004Comparison of mammographically based diagnosis with and without using of CAD using a double-blinded protocolEur J Radiol516672CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Birdwell, RL, Ikeda, DM, O’Shaughnessy, KF, Sickles, EA 2001Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detectionRadiology219192202PubMed Birdwell, RL, Ikeda, DM, O’Shaughnessy, KF, Sickles, EA 2001Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detectionRadiology219192202PubMed
17.
go back to reference Malich, A, Marx, C, Facius, M, et al. 2004Value of computer aided detection (CAD) of breast cancers on mammograms, which were not detected by radiologists. Accepted at ECR 2004Eur RadiolS1–14278 Malich, A, Marx, C, Facius, M,  et al. 2004Value of computer aided detection (CAD) of breast cancers on mammograms, which were not detected by radiologists. Accepted at ECR 2004Eur RadiolS1–14278
18.
go back to reference Ehrenstein, T, Kenzel, PP, Hadijuana, J, et al. 2000Computer assisted diagnosis in mammography: evaluation of an expert systemEur Radiol10117 Ehrenstein, T, Kenzel, PP, Hadijuana, J,  et al. 2000Computer assisted diagnosis in mammography: evaluation of an expert systemEur Radiol10117
19.
go back to reference Marx, C, Schütze, B, Fleck, M, O’Shaughnessy, K, Kaiser, WA 1997Computer aided diagnosis in mammographyEur Radiol782CrossRefPubMed Marx, C, Schütze, B, Fleck, M, O’Shaughnessy, K, Kaiser, WA 1997Computer aided diagnosis in mammographyEur Radiol782CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Jiang, Y, Nishikawa, RM, Schmidt, RA, Metz, CE, Doi, K 1999Comparison of independent double reading and computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for the diagnosis of breast lesionsRadiology213323 Jiang, Y, Nishikawa, RM, Schmidt, RA, Metz, CE, Doi, K 1999Comparison of independent double reading and computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) for the diagnosis of breast lesionsRadiology213323
21.
go back to reference Malich, A, Sauner, D, Marx, C, Facius, M, Boehm, T, Fleck, M, Pfleiderer, SOR, Kaiser, WA 2003Influence of size histology on tumour detection rate of a computer-aided detection (CAD)-systemRadiology228851856PubMed Malich, A, Sauner, D, Marx, C, Facius, M, Boehm, T, Fleck, M, Pfleiderer, SOR, Kaiser, WA 2003Influence of size histology on tumour detection rate of a computer-aided detection (CAD)-systemRadiology228851856PubMed
22.
go back to reference Ho, WT, Lam, PWT 2003Clinical performance of computer-assisted detection (CAD) system in detecting carcinoma in breast of different densitiesClin Radiol58133136CrossRefPubMed Ho, WT, Lam, PWT 2003Clinical performance of computer-assisted detection (CAD) system in detecting carcinoma in breast of different densitiesClin Radiol58133136CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Leconte, I, Feger, C, Galant, C, Berliere, M, Berg, BV, D’Hoore, W, Maldague, B 2003Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast densityAm J Roentgenol18016751679 Leconte, I, Feger, C, Galant, C, Berliere, M, Berg, BV, D’Hoore, W, Maldague, B 2003Mammography and subsequent whole-breast sonography of nonpalpable breast cancers: the importance of radiologic breast densityAm J Roentgenol18016751679
24.
go back to reference Malich, A, Freesmeyer, MG, Petrovitch, A, Pfleiderer, SO, Fischer, D, Marx, C, Kaiser, WA 2004Clinical Impact of an improved mammographic computer-aided detection (CAD)-system in the detection of breast masses. Accepted at ECR 2004Eur RadiolS1–14215 Malich, A, Freesmeyer, MG, Petrovitch, A, Pfleiderer, SO, Fischer, D, Marx, C, Kaiser, WA 2004Clinical Impact of an improved mammographic computer-aided detection (CAD)-system in the detection of breast masses. Accepted at ECR 2004Eur RadiolS1–14215
25.
go back to reference Chang, YH, Zheng, B, Gur, D 1994Computer-aided detection of clustered microcalcifications on digitized mammograms: a robustness experimentAcad Radiol4415418 Chang, YH, Zheng, B, Gur, D 1994Computer-aided detection of clustered microcalcifications on digitized mammograms: a robustness experimentAcad Radiol4415418
26.
go back to reference Brem, RF, Schoonjans, JM, Hoffmeister, J, Raza, S, Baum, JK 2000Evaluation of breast cancer with a computer-aided detection system by mammographic appearance, histology and lesion sizeRadiology217400 Brem, RF, Schoonjans, JM, Hoffmeister, J, Raza, S, Baum, JK 2000Evaluation of breast cancer with a computer-aided detection system by mammographic appearance, histology and lesion sizeRadiology217400
27.
go back to reference Warren Burhenne, LJ, Wood, SA, D’Orsi, CJ, et al. 2000Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammographyRadiology215554562PubMed Warren Burhenne, LJ, Wood, SA, D’Orsi, CJ,  et al. 2000Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammographyRadiology215554562PubMed
28.
go back to reference Hoffmeister, JW, Rogers, SK, Simio, MP, et al. 2002Determining efficacy of mammographic CAD systemsJ Digit Imaging15198200CrossRefPubMed Hoffmeister, JW, Rogers, SK, Simio, MP,  et al. 2002Determining efficacy of mammographic CAD systemsJ Digit Imaging15198200CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Nishikawa, RM, Giger, ML, Doi, K, et al. 1994Effect of case selection on the performance of computer-aided detection schemesMed Phys21265269CrossRefPubMed Nishikawa, RM, Giger, ML, Doi, K,  et al. 1994Effect of case selection on the performance of computer-aided detection schemesMed Phys21265269CrossRefPubMed
30.
go back to reference Brem, RF, Baum, J, Lechner, M, Kaplan, S, Souders, S, Naul, LG, Hoffmeister, J 2003Improvement in sensitivity of screening mammography with computer-aided detection: a multiinstitutional trialAm J Roentgenol181687693 Brem, RF, Baum, J, Lechner, M, Kaplan, S, Souders, S, Naul, LG, Hoffmeister, J 2003Improvement in sensitivity of screening mammography with computer-aided detection: a multiinstitutional trialAm J Roentgenol181687693
31.
go back to reference Freer, TW, Ulissey, MJ 2001Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast centerRadiology220781786PubMed Freer, TW, Ulissey, MJ 2001Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast centerRadiology220781786PubMed
Metadata
Title
Effect of Breast Density on Computer Aided Detection
Authors
Ansgar Malich, M.D.
Dorothee R. Fischer, M.D.
Mirjam Facius, M.D.
Alexander Petrovitch, M.D.
Joachim Boettcher, M.D.
Christiane Marx, M.D.
Andreas Hansch, M.D.
Werner A. Kaiser, M.D.
Publication date
01-09-2005
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Journal of Imaging Informatics in Medicine / Issue 3/2005
Print ISSN: 2948-2925
Electronic ISSN: 2948-2933
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10278-004-1047-x

Other articles of this Issue 3/2005

Journal of Digital Imaging 3/2005 Go to the issue