Advertisement

Current Screening Practice: Implications for the Introduction of CAD

  • Lucy Tomlinson
  • Nathalie Hurley
  • Caroline Boggis
  • Julie Morris
  • Emma Hurley
  • Sue Astley
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4046)

Abstract

The UK National Health Service Breast Screening Programme (NHSBSP) provides free mammographic screening for all women between the ages of 50 and 69. This paper examines in detail the way in which the programme is implemented in one of the busiest breast screening centres, discussing the implications of current practice for the introduction of computer aided detection systems. The paper also investigates the different types of abnormality that arise in older and younger women within the screening age group, and discusses how this is likely to affect prompting systems.

Keywords

Breast Density Cancer Detection Rate Double Read Soft Copy Reading Film Reading 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Forrest APM 1986 Breast Cancer Screening: Report to the Health Ministers of England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. HMSO London (1986) Google Scholar
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Blanks, R.G., Wallis, M.G., Moss, S.M.: A comparison of cancer detection rates achieved by breast cancer screening programmes by number of readers, for one and two view mammography: results from the UK National Health Service breast screening Programme. Journal of Medical screening 5, 195–201 (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Liston, J.C., Dall, B.J.G.: Can the NHS Breast Screening Programme afford not to double read screening mammograms? Clinical Radiology 58, 474–477 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gilbert, F.J., Astley, S.M., McGee, M.A., Gillan, M.G.C., Boggis, C.R.M., Griffiths, P.M., Duffy, S.W.: Comparison of double reading and single reading with CAD in the UK NHS Breast Screening Program: Computer Aided Detection Evaluation Trial (CADET). Radiology (in press)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Astley, S.M., Duffy, S.W., Boggis, C.R.M., Wilson, M., et al.: Mammography reading with computer-aided detection (CAD): performance of different readers. In: Astley, S.M., Brady, M., Rose, C., Zwiggelaar, R. (eds.) IWDM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4046, pp. 97–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Malich, A., Sauner, D.C., et al.: Influence of breast lesion size and histologic findings on tumour detection rate of a computer-aided diagnosis system. Radiology 228(3), 851–856 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brem, R.F., Hoffmeister, J.W., et al.: Impact of breast density on computer-aided detection for breast cancer. Am. J. Roentgenol. 184(2), 439–444 (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ho, W.T., Lam, P.W.T.: Clinical Performance of Computer-Aided Detection (CAD) System in Detecting Carcinoma in Breasts of Different Densities. Clinical Radiology 58, 133–136 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Malich, A., Fischer, D.R., Facius, M., Petrovitch, A., Boettche, J.: Digit Imaging. 18(3), 227–233 (2005); Marx, C., Hansch, A., Kaiser, W.A.: Effect of breast density on computer aided detectionGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wolfe, J.N.: Breast patterns as an index of risk for developing breast cancer. American Journal of Roentgenology 26(6), 1130–1137 (1976)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Saftlas, A.F., Szklo, M.: Mammographic parenchymal patterns and breast cancer risk. Epidemiol. Rev. 9, 146–174 (1987)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lehman, C.D., White, E., Peacock, S., Drucker, M.J., Urban, N.: Effect of age and breast density on screening mammograms with false-positive findings. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 173(6), 1651–1655 (1999)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Brem, R.F., Hoffmeister, J.W., Zisman, G., DeSimio, M.P., Rogers, S.K.: A Computer-Aided Detection System for the Evaluation of Breast Cancer by Mammographic Appearance and Lesion Size. American Journal of Roentenology 184, 893–896 (2005)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Evans, W.P., Warren Burhenne, L.J., Laurie, L., O’Shaughnessy, K.F., Castellino, R.A.: Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast: Mammographic Characteristics and Computer-aided Detection. Radiology 225, 182–189 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Brem, R.F., Rapelyea, J.A., Zisman, G., Hoffmeister, J.W., DeSimio, M.P.: Evaluation of breast cancer with a computer-aided detection system by mammographic appearance and histopathology. Cancer 104, 931–935 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Birdwell, R.L., Ikeda, D.M., O’Shaughnessy, K.F., Sickles, E.A.: Mammographic Characteristics of 115 Missed Cancers Later Detected with Screening Mammography and the Potential Utility of Computer-aided Detection. Radiology 219, 192–202 (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baker, J.A., Rosen, E.L., et al.: CAD in screening mammography: sensitivity of commercial CAD systems for detecting architectural distortion. Am. J. Roentgenol. 181(4), 1083–1088 (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lucy Tomlinson
    • 1
  • Nathalie Hurley
    • 1
  • Caroline Boggis
    • 2
  • Julie Morris
    • 3
  • Emma Hurley
    • 2
  • Sue Astley
    • 4
  1. 1.School of MedicineUniversity of ManchesterManchesterEngland
  2. 2.Nightingale Breast CentreSouth Manchester University Hospitals Trust 
  3. 3.Department of Medical StatisticsSouth Manchester University Hospitals Trust 
  4. 4.Imaging Science and Biomedical EngineeringUniversity of ManchesterManchester

Personalised recommendations