Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology 1/2014

Open Access 01-12-2014 | Research

Who could benefit the most from using a computer-aided detection system in full-field digital mammography?

Authors: Na Young Jung, Bong Joo Kang, Hyeon Sook Kim, Eun Suk Cha, Jae Hee Lee, Chang Suk Park, In Young Whang, Sung Hun Kim, Yeong Yi An, Jae Jeong Choi

Published in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology | Issue 1/2014

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The computer-aided detection (CAD) system on mammography has the potential to assist radiologists in breast cancer screening. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the CAD system in full-field digital mammography for detecting breast cancer when used by dedicated breast radiologist (BR) and radiology resident (RR), and to reveal who could benefit the most from a CAD application.

Methods

We retrospectively chose 100 image sets from mammographies performed with CAD between June 2008 and June 2010. Thirty masses (15 benign and 15 malignant), 30 microcalcifications (15 benign and 15 malignant), and 40 normal mammography images were included. The participating radiologists consisted of 7 BRs and 13 RRs. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for total, normal plus microcalcification and normal plus mass both with and without CAD use for each reader. We compared the diagnostic performance values obtained with and without CAD use for the BR and RR groups, respectively. The reading time reviewing one set of 100 images and time reduction with CAD use for the BR and RR groups were also evaluated.

Results

The diagnostic performance was generally higher in the BR group than in the RR group. Sensitivity improved with CAD use in the BR and RR groups (from 81.10 to 84.29% for BR; 75.38 to 77.95% for RR). A tendency for improvement in all diagnostic performance values was observed in the BR group, whereas in the RR group, sensitivity improved but specificity, PPV, and NPV did not. None of the diagnostic performance parameters were significantly different. The mean reading time was shortened with CAD use in both the BR and RR groups (111.6 minutes to 94.3 minutes for BR; 135.5 minutes to 109.8 minutes for RR). The mean time reduction was higher for the RR than that in the BR group.

Conclusions

CAD was helpful for dedicated BRs to improve their diagnostic performance and for RRs to improve the sensitivity in a screening setting. CAD could be essential for radiologists by decreasing reading time without decreasing diagnostic performance.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Warren Burhenne LJ, Wood SA, D’Orsi CJ, Feig SA, Kopans DB, O’Shaughnessy KF, Sickles EA, Tabar L, Vyborny CJ, Castellino RA: Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology. 2000, 215: 554-562. 10.1148/radiology.215.2.r00ma15554.CrossRefPubMed Warren Burhenne LJ, Wood SA, D’Orsi CJ, Feig SA, Kopans DB, O’Shaughnessy KF, Sickles EA, Tabar L, Vyborny CJ, Castellino RA: Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. Radiology. 2000, 215: 554-562. 10.1148/radiology.215.2.r00ma15554.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Birdwell RL, Bandodkar P, Ikeda DM: Computer-aided detection with screening mammography in a university hospital setting. Radiology. 2005, 236: 451-457. 10.1148/radiol.2362040864.CrossRefPubMed Birdwell RL, Bandodkar P, Ikeda DM: Computer-aided detection with screening mammography in a university hospital setting. Radiology. 2005, 236: 451-457. 10.1148/radiol.2362040864.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Harvey J: Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable breast carcinoma: retrospective vs blinded interpretation. 1993 ARRS President’s Award. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993, 1993 (161): 1167-1172.CrossRef Harvey J: Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable breast carcinoma: retrospective vs blinded interpretation. 1993 ARRS President’s Award. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1993, 1993 (161): 1167-1172.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference 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: 192-202. 10.1148/radiology.219.1.r01ap16192.CrossRefPubMed 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: 192-202. 10.1148/radiology.219.1.r01ap16192.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Beam CA, Sullivan DC, Layde PM: Effect of human variability on independent double reading in screening mammography. Acad Radiol. 1996, 3: 891-897. 10.1016/S1076-6332(96)80296-0.CrossRefPubMed Beam CA, Sullivan DC, Layde PM: Effect of human variability on independent double reading in screening mammography. Acad Radiol. 1996, 3: 891-897. 10.1016/S1076-6332(96)80296-0.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AA: Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology. 1994, 191: 241-244.CrossRefPubMed Thurfjell EL, Lernevall KA, Taube AA: Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. Radiology. 1994, 191: 241-244.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Freer TW, Ulissey MJ: Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology. 2001, 220: 781-786. 10.1148/radiol.2203001282.CrossRefPubMed Freer TW, Ulissey MJ: Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology. 2001, 220: 781-786. 10.1148/radiol.2203001282.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference 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: 578-584. 10.1148/radiol.2322030034.CrossRefPubMed 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: 578-584. 10.1148/radiol.2322030034.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Ko JM, Nicholas MJ, Mendel JB, Slanetz PJ: Prospective assessment of computer-aided detection in interpretation of screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006, 187: 1483-1491. 10.2214/AJR.05.1582.CrossRefPubMed Ko JM, Nicholas MJ, Mendel JB, Slanetz PJ: Prospective assessment of computer-aided detection in interpretation of screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006, 187: 1483-1491. 10.2214/AJR.05.1582.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Yang SK, Moon WK, Cho N, Park JS, Cha JH, Kim SM, Kim SJ, Im JG: Screening mammography-detected cancers: sensitivity of a computer-aided detection system applied to full-field digital mammograms. Radiology. 2007, 244: 104-111. 10.1148/radiol.2441060756.CrossRefPubMed Yang SK, Moon WK, Cho N, Park JS, Cha JH, Kim SM, Kim SJ, Im JG: Screening mammography-detected cancers: sensitivity of a computer-aided detection system applied to full-field digital mammograms. Radiology. 2007, 244: 104-111. 10.1148/radiol.2441060756.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Bolivar AV, Gomez SS, Merino P, Alonso-Bartolome P, Garcia EO, Cacho PM, Hoffmeister JW: Computer-aided detection system applied to full-field digital mammograms. Acta Radiol. 2010, 51: 1086-1092. 10.3109/02841851.2010.520024.CrossRefPubMed Bolivar AV, Gomez SS, Merino P, Alonso-Bartolome P, Garcia EO, Cacho PM, Hoffmeister JW: Computer-aided detection system applied to full-field digital mammograms. Acta Radiol. 2010, 51: 1086-1092. 10.3109/02841851.2010.520024.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Huo Z, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, Metz CE: Breast cancer: effectiveness of computer-aided diagnosis—observer study with independent database of mammograms. Radiology. 2002, 224: 560-568. 10.1148/radiol.2242010703.CrossRefPubMed Huo Z, Giger ML, Vyborny CJ, Metz CE: Breast cancer: effectiveness of computer-aided diagnosis—observer study with independent database of mammograms. Radiology. 2002, 224: 560-568. 10.1148/radiol.2242010703.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Quek ST, Thng CH, Khoo JB, Koh WL: Radiologists’ detection of mammographic abnormalities with and without a computer-aided detection system. Australas Radiol. 2003, 47: 257-260. 10.1046/j.1440-1673.2003.01173.x.CrossRefPubMed Quek ST, Thng CH, Khoo JB, Koh WL: Radiologists’ detection of mammographic abnormalities with and without a computer-aided detection system. Australas Radiol. 2003, 47: 257-260. 10.1046/j.1440-1673.2003.01173.x.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Sohns C, Angic BC, Sossalla S, Konietschke F, Obenauer S: CAD in full-field digital mammography—influence of reader experience and application of CAD on interpretation of time. Clin Imaging. 2010, 34: 418-424. 10.1016/j.clinimag.2009.10.039.CrossRefPubMed Sohns C, Angic BC, Sossalla S, Konietschke F, Obenauer S: CAD in full-field digital mammography—influence of reader experience and application of CAD on interpretation of time. Clin Imaging. 2010, 34: 418-424. 10.1016/j.clinimag.2009.10.039.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference American College of Radiology: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: BI-RADS atlas. 2003, Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 4 American College of Radiology: Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System: BI-RADS atlas. 2003, Reston, Va: American College of Radiology, 4
17.
go back to reference Morton MJ, Whaley DH, Brandt KR, Amrami KK: Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection—prospective evaluation. Radiology. 2006, 239: 375-383. 10.1148/radiol.2392042121.CrossRefPubMed Morton MJ, Whaley DH, Brandt KR, Amrami KK: Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection—prospective evaluation. Radiology. 2006, 239: 375-383. 10.1148/radiol.2392042121.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Kim SJ, Moon WK, Cho N, Cha JH, Kim SM, Im JG: Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: sensitivity and reproducibility in serial examinations. Radiology. 2008, 246: 71-80. 10.1148/radiol.2461062072.CrossRefPubMed Kim SJ, Moon WK, Cho N, Cha JH, Kim SM, Im JG: Computer-aided detection in full-field digital mammography: sensitivity and reproducibility in serial examinations. Radiology. 2008, 246: 71-80. 10.1148/radiol.2461062072.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Fenton JJ, Taplin SH, Carney PA, Abraham L, Sickles EA, D’Orsi C, Berns EA, Cutter G, Hendrick RE, Barlow WE, Elmore JG: Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med. 2007, 356: 1399-1409. 10.1056/NEJMoa066099.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Fenton JJ, Taplin SH, Carney PA, Abraham L, Sickles EA, D’Orsi C, Berns EA, Cutter G, Hendrick RE, Barlow WE, Elmore JG: Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. N Engl J Med. 2007, 356: 1399-1409. 10.1056/NEJMoa066099.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Singh S, Maxwell J, Baker JA, Nicholas JL, Lo JY: Computer-aided classification of breast masses: performance and interobserver variability of expert radiologists versus residents. Radiology. 2011, 258: 73-80. 10.1148/radiol.10081308.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Singh S, Maxwell J, Baker JA, Nicholas JL, Lo JY: Computer-aided classification of breast masses: performance and interobserver variability of expert radiologists versus residents. Radiology. 2011, 258: 73-80. 10.1148/radiol.10081308.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
21.
go back to reference Samulski M, Hupse R, Boetes C, Mus RD, den Heeten GJ, Karssemeijer N: Using computer-aided detection in mammography as a decision support. Eur Radiol. 2010, 20: 2323-2330. 10.1007/s00330-010-1821-8.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed Samulski M, Hupse R, Boetes C, Mus RD, den Heeten GJ, Karssemeijer N: Using computer-aided detection in mammography as a decision support. Eur Radiol. 2010, 20: 2323-2330. 10.1007/s00330-010-1821-8.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Who could benefit the most from using a computer-aided detection system in full-field digital mammography?
Authors
Na Young Jung
Bong Joo Kang
Hyeon Sook Kim
Eun Suk Cha
Jae Hee Lee
Chang Suk Park
In Young Whang
Sung Hun Kim
Yeong Yi An
Jae Jeong Choi
Publication date
01-12-2014
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology / Issue 1/2014
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7819
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7819-12-168

Other articles of this Issue 1/2014

World Journal of Surgical Oncology 1/2014 Go to the issue