|
|
||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Breast Imaging |
1 From the Departments of Biomedical Engineering and Radiology, Digital Imaging Research Division, Duke University Medical Center, DUMC 3302, Durham, NC 27710. Received July 23, 2001; revision requested September 4; revision received October 12; accepted December 10. Supported in part by U.S. Public Health Service grants R29-CA75547, R21-CA092573, and R21-CA81309 awarded by the National Cancer Institute; Whitaker Foundation grants RG-97-0322 and SO-97-0035; U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command grant DAMD17-99-1-9174 awarded by the U.S. Army; and Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation grants 9803 and BCTR2000730A. Address correspondence to M.K.M. (e-mail: markey@duke.edu).
PURPOSE: To compare the performance of a computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) system for diagnosis of previously detected lesions, based on radiologist-extracted findings on masses and calcifications.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A feed-forward, back-propagation artificial neural network (BP-ANN) was trained in a round-robin (leave-one-out) manner to predict biopsy outcome from mammographic findings (according to the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System) and patient age. The BP-ANN was trained by using a large (>1,000 cases) heterogeneous data set containing masses and microcalcifications. The performances of the BP-ANN on masses and microcalcifications were compared with use of receiver operating characteristic analysis and a z test for uncorrelated samples.
RESULTS: The BP-ANN performed significantly better on masses than microcalcifications in terms of both the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve and the partial receiver operating characteristic area index. A similar difference in performance was observed with a second model (linear discriminant analysis) and also with a second data set from a similar institution.
CONCLUSION: Masses and calcifications should be considered separately when evaluating CAD systems for breast cancer diagnosis.
© RSNA, 2002
Index terms: Breast neoplasms, 00.31, 00.32 Breast neoplasms, calcification, 00.81 Breast neoplasms, diagnosis, 00.129 Computers, diagnostic aid Computers, neural network
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. Chhatwal, O. Alagoz, M. J. Lindstrom, C. E. Kahn Jr., K. A. Shaffer, and E. S. Burnside A Logistic Regression Model Based on the National Mammography Database Format to Aid Breast Cancer Diagnosis Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2009; 192(4): 1117 - 1127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A Karahaliou, S Skiadopoulos, I Boniatis, P Sakellaropoulos, E Likaki, G Panayiotakis, and L Costaridou Texture analysis of tissue surrounding microcalcifications on mammograms for breast cancer diagnosis Br. J. Radiol., August 1, 2007; 80(956): 648 - 656. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. A. Helvie, L. Hadjiiski, E. Makariou, H.-P. Chan, N. Petrick, B. Sahiner, S.-C. B. Lo, M. Freedman, D. Adler, J. Bailey, et al. Sensitivity of Noncommercial Computer-aided Detection System for Mammographic Breast Cancer Detection: Pilot Clinical Trial Radiology, April 1, 2004; 231(1): 208 - 214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||