Computer-aided detection mammography for breast cancer screening: systematic review and meta-analysis
- 480 Downloads
Mammography is generally accepted as the best available breast cancer screening method; however, some cancers detectable on mammography images are missed. Computer-aided detection (CAD) systems for mammography are intended to reduce false negatives by marking suspicious areas of the mammograms for reviewers to consider. Although the prospect of improving the sensitivity of screening mammograms has led to the diffusion of CAD for mammography, little is known about its diagnostic accuracy.
To assess the diagnostic performance of CAD for screening mammography in terms of sensitivity and specificity and incremental recall, biopsy, and cancer diagnosis rates.
Published literature identified by systematic literature searches of 17 databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, searched through 25 September 2008.
A reviewer and an information specialist selected full-length English-language articles that enrolled asymptomatic women for routine breast cancer screening and provided data needed for our analyses using criteria established a priori. We identified 75 potentially relevant publications, of which 7 (9%) were included.
Data were extracted and internal validity was assessed by a single review author, and forms were approved by the co-authors.
Three studies (n = 347,324) reported sensitivity and specificity, or data to calculate them, and five studies (n = 51,162) reported data to calculate incremental rates of cancer diagnoses and recall and biopsy of women who did not have breast cancer. The pooled sensitivity was 86.0% (95% CI 84.2–87.6%) and specificity was 88.2% (95% CI 88.1–88.3%). Of the 100,000 women screened, CAD yielded an additional 50 (95% CI 30–80) correct breast cancer diagnoses, 1,190 (95% CI 1,090–1,290) recalls of healthy women, and 80 (95% CI 60–100) biopsies of healthy women. A total of 96% (95% CI 93.9–97.3%) of women recalled based upon CAD and 65.1% (95% CI 52.3–76.0%) of women biopsied based upon CAD were healthy. No studies reported patient-oriented clinical outcomes.
KeywordsComputer-aided detection (CAD) Mammography Screening Sensitivity and specificity Incremental diagnoses Breast cancer
- 6.Whiting P, Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Kleijnen J (2003) The development of QUADAS: a tool for the quality assessment of studies of diagnostic accuracy included in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 3(25):1–42Google Scholar
- 9.Borenstein M, Hedges L, Higgins J, Rothstein H (2005) Comprehensive meta-analysis. Version 2. Englewood (NJ): Biostat. Also available: http://www.meta-analysis.com/pages/about_us.html
- 13.Taylor P (2008) (Centre for Health Informatics and Multiprofessional Education, University College London, Highgate Hill). Personal communication, 1 p, 29 September 2008Google Scholar
- 20.Georgian-Smith D, Moore RH, Halpern E, Yeh ED, Rafferty EA, D’Alessandro HA, Staffa M, Hall DA, McCarthy KA, Kopans DB (2007) Blinded comparison of computer-aided detection with human second reading in screening mammography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 189(5):1135–1141. doi:10.2214/AJR.07.2393 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar