(Downloading may take up to 30 seconds. If the slide opens in your browser, select File -> Save As to save it.)
Terms and Conditions for Use
Click on image to view larger version.
View larger version (213K)
Figure 3: ROC (top row) and PPV plots (bottom row) for the EM modalities for EIS conductivity (far left), MIS conductivity (left), NIR total hemoglobin (right) contrast ratios, and those for all three modalities combined (far right). Comparison groups for the ROC analyses were based on cancers in BI-RADS category 4 or 5 for subjects in the abnormal group versus the normal control subjects (BI-RADS category 1). Dotted horizontal lines in each PPV plot show the percentage of cancers among the subjects with BI-RADS 4 or 5 classification in the examination sets analyzed for each modality. EIS shows good sensitivity to breast abnormality but relatively poor specificity, whereas MIS and NIR are more diagnostically specific and improve the PPV of mammography considerably in the subjects in the abnormal group pool. The multimodal index shows some diagnostic improvement over the best single-modality performance. Numbers in parentheses after AUC values are the 95% confidence intervals. AUC = area under the ROC curve, HbT = total hemoglobin, 
= conductivity.
