Computer-aided-detection marker value and breast density in the detection of invasive lobular carcinoma
Invasive Lobular Carcinoma (ILC) is frequently a mammographic and diagnostic dilemma; thus any additional information that CAD (Computer-Aided Detection) systems can give radiologists may be helpful. Our study was to evaluate the role of CAD numeric values as indicators of malignancy and the effect of breast density in the diagnosis of ILC.
Materials and methods
Eighty consecutive biopsy-proven ILC cases with CAD (ImageChecker®, Hologic | R2, Santa Clara, CA, versions 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 5.0, 5.2) diagnosed between June 2002 and December 2004 were retrospectively reviewed. Data included: BIRADS® breast density, whether CAD marked the cancer at diagnosis year or years prior, and lesion type. Study mammograms underwent additional CAD scans (Image Checker® V5.3, V8.0, V8.1) to obtain a numeric value associated with each marker, low values represent increasingly suspicious features.
CAD correctly marked 65% (52/80) of ILC cases, detection was found to decrease with increased breast density. Numeric values of CAD marks at sites of carcinoma showed median score of 171 (range 0 – 1121).
The CAD marker may potentially be used as an additional indicator of suspicious lesion features in all breast densities and higher likelihood that an area on the mammogram requires further investigation.
KeywordsBreast density Computer aided detection Carcinoma Lobular
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.Page DL, Anderson TJ (1987) Diagnostic histopathology of the breast. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh, pp 219–226Google Scholar
- 6.Roehrig J, Chief Science Officer, R2 Technology, Inc.–A Hologic Company, Santa Clara (Personal Communication)Google Scholar
- 7.R2 Corporation, Sunnyvale, CA, presentation “Human Response: Realizing the Potential of CAD”Google Scholar
- 8.Destounis SV (2005) Retrospective study evaluating the accuracy of CAD in marking invasive lobular carcinoma. CARS Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- 11.Skaane P, Kshirsagar A, Young K, Stapleton S (2004) Comparison of CAD performance and independent double-reading in screen-film mammography and full-field digital mammography with soft-copy reading: results from the follow-up of the paired oslo I study, November 29, RSNA, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
- 12.Destounis SV, DiNitto P, Young W, Bonaccio E, Zuley M, Willison K (2007) Computer-aided detection in screening mammography: prospective double blinded study in a clinical practice. Radiology (in press)Google Scholar
- 13.Mammography Quality Standard Act Regulations, Part 900—Mammography, Subpart B Quality Standards for Certification, www.fda.govGoogle Scholar
- 22.Brem RF, Hoffmeister JW, Rapelyea JA, Zisman G, Mohtashemi K, Jindal G, DiSimio M, Rogers S (2005) Impact of breast density on computer-aided detection for breast cancer. AJR AM J Roentgenol 184(6):1968Google Scholar
- 24.Roehrig J Chief Science Officer, R2 Technology, Inc. –A Hologic Company, Santa Clara, Personal CommunicationGoogle Scholar