Radiology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Published online before print February 5, 2004, 10.1148/radiol.2303030254
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
2303030254v1
230/3/811    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ikeda, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Brenner, R. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ikeda, D. M.
Right arrow Articles by Brenner, R. J.
(Radiology 2004;230:811-819.)
© RSNA, 2004


Breast Imaging

Computer-aided Detection Output on 172 Subtle Findings on Normal Mammograms Previously Obtained in Women with Breast Cancer Detected at Follow-Up Screening Mammography1

Debra M. Ikeda, MD, Robyn L. Birdwell, MD, Kathryn F. O’Shaughnessy, PhD, Edward A. Sickles, MD and R. James Brenner, MD, JD

1 From the Dept of Radiology, Stanford Univ Medical Center, Room S-068A, Rte 1, 300 Pasteur Dr, Stanford, CA 94305-5105 (D.M.I., R.L.B.); R2 Technology, Sunnyvale, Calif (K.F.O.); Dept of Radiology, Univ of California, San Francisco (E.A.S.); Eisenberg Keefer Breast Center, John Wayne Cancer Institute, St John’s Health Center, Santa Monica, Calif (R.J.B.); and Dept of Radiology, Geffen School of Medicine, Univ of California, Los Angeles (R.J.B.). Received February 13, 2003; revision requested May 2; revision received July 15; accepted August 22. Address correspondence to D.M.I.

PURPOSE: To evaluate, by using a computer-aided detection (CAD) program, the nonspecific findings on normal screening mammograms obtained in women in whom breast cancer was later detected at follow-up screening mammography.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Four hundred ninety-three mammogram pairs—an initial negative screening mammogram and a subsequently obtained screening mammogram showing cancer—were collected. The mean interval between examinations was 14.6 months. In 169 cases, in which 172 cancers were later depicted, findings on the initial mammogram were subtle enough that either none or only one or two of five blinded radiologists recommended screening recall. On the initial negative mammograms, of the 172 areas where cancer later developed, 137 (80%) had subtle nonspecific findings and were retrospectively judged as having a benign or normal appearance. The mammograms with these subtle findings were evaluated with a commercially available CAD program, and the numbers of CAD marks on these nonspecific findings were analyzed.

RESULTS: Of the 172 cancers, 129 (75%) were invasive and 43 (25%) were ductal carcinoma in situ. The CAD program marked 72 (42%) of the 172 findings that subsequently developed into cancer: 24 (29%) of 82 findings recalled by none, 25 (49%) of 51 findings recalled by one, and 23 (59%) of 39 findings recalled by two of the five radiologists. Among the 137 areas with nonspecific normal or benign findings, 41 (30%) areas where cancer subsequently developed were marked by the CAD program.

CONCLUSION: A subset of cancers have perceptible but nonspecific mammographic findings that may be marked by a CAD program, even when the findings do not warrant recall as judged at blinded and unblinded radiologist review. The authors believe failure to act on such nonspecific but CAD-marked findings prospectively does not constitute interpretation below a reasonable standard of care.

© RSNA, 2004

Index terms: Breast neoplasms, 00.31, 00.32 • Cancer screening • Computers, diagnostic aid • Radiography, digital




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
RadiologyHome page
F. Li, R. Engelmann, C. E. Metz, K. Doi, and H. MacMahon
Lung Cancers Missed on Chest Radiographs: Results Obtained with a Commercial Computer-aided Detection Program
Radiology, January 1, 2008; 246(1): 273 - 280.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. J. Kim, W. K. Moon, N. Cho, J. H. Cha, S. M. Kim, and J.-G. Im
Computer-aided Detection in Full-Field Digital Mammography: Sensitivity and Reproducibility in Serial Examinations
Radiology, December 1, 2007; 246(1): 71 - 80.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
D. Georgian-Smith, R. H. Moore, E. Halpern, E. D. Yeh, E. A. Rafferty, H. A. D'Alessandro, M. Staffa, D. A. Hall, K. A. McCarthy, and D. B. Kopans
Blinded Comparison of Computer-Aided Detection with Human Second Reading in Screening Mammography
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2007; 189(5): 1135 - 1141.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
S. K. Yang, W. K. Moon, N. Cho, J. S. Park, J. H. Cha, S. M. Kim, S. J. Kim, and J.-G. Im
Screening Mammography-detected Cancers: Sensitivity of a Computer-aided Detection System Applied to Full-Field Digital Mammograms
Radiology, July 1, 2007; 244(1): 104 - 111.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
P. Skaane, A. Kshirsagar, S. Stapleton, K. Young, and R. A. Castellino
Effect of Computer-Aided Detection on Independent Double Reading of Paired Screen-Film and Full-Field Digital Screening Mammograms
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2007; 188(2): 377 - 384.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
V. R. Pai, N. E. Gregory, A. E. Swinford, and M. Rebner
Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Computer-aided Detection in Screening Mammography
Radiology, December 1, 2006; 241(3): 689 - 694.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. C. Dean and C. C. Ilvento
Improved cancer detection using computer-aided detection with diagnostic and screening mammography: prospective study of 104 cancers.
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2006; 187(1): 20 - 28.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
J. H. Sumkin, D. Gur, R. L. Birdwell, and D. M. Ikeda
Computer-aided Detection with Screening Mammography: Improving Performance or Simply Shifting the Operating Point?
Radiology, June 1, 2006; 239(3): 916 - 918.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
R. J. Brenner, M. J. Ulissey, and R. M. Wilt
Computer-Aided Detection as Evidence in the Courtroom: Potential Implications of an Appellate Court's Ruling
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2006; 186(1): 48 - 51.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
L. A. L. Khoo, P. Taylor, and R. M. Given-Wilson
Computer-aided Detection in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Programme: Prospective Study
Radiology, November 1, 2005; 237(2): 444 - 449.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
K Doi
Current status and future potential of computer-aided diagnosis in medical imaging
Br. J. Radiol., January 1, 2005; 78(suppl_1): S3 - s19.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
RADIOLOGY RADIOGRAPHICS RSNA JOURNALS ONLINE
Copyright © 2004 by the Radiological Society of North America.