Methods for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Screening Mammography Are Not Necessarily Valid for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Computer-Aided Detection in Screening Mammography

  • Robert M. Nishikawa
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7361)

Abstract

It is important that the clinical effectiveness of computer-aided detection (CADe) systems be evaluated. Since CADe is used to improve the effectiveness of screening mammography, it might be expected that the same methods and endpoints that are used to evaluate screening mammography can be used to evaluated screening mammography when CADe is used. Unfortunately, this is not always true and when the assumption fails, erroneous conclusions are often made. In clinical studies the choice of endpoints, estimation of sensitivity, and the significance of DCIS are potential problem areas. Further, the use of ROC versus FROC can affect the measured performance.

Keywords

Screening Mammography Interval Cancer Screen Mammography Cancer Detection Rate Screening Mammogram 
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.
    Freer, T.W., Ulissey, M.J.: Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. Radiology 220, 781–786 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gur, D., Sumkin, J.H., Rockette, H.E., Ganott, M., Hakim, C., Hardesty, L., Poller, W.R., Shah, R., Wallace, L.: Changes in breast cancer detection and mammography recall rates after the introduction of a computer-Aided detection system. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 96, 185–190 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Helvie, M.A., Hadjiiski, L., Makariou, E., Chan, H.-P., Petrick, N., Sahiner, B., Lo, S.-C.B., Freedman, M., Adler, D., Bailey, J., Blane, C., Hoff, D., Hunt, K., Joynt, L., Klein, K., Paramagul, C., Patterson, S.K., Roubidoux, M.A.: Sensitivity of noncommercial computer-aided detection system for mammographic breast cancer detection. Radiology 231, 208–214 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Birdwell, R.L., Bandodkar, P., Ikeda, D.M.: Computer-aided detection with screening mammography in a university hospital setting. Radiology 236, 451–457 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cupples, T.E., Cunningham, J.E., Reynolds, J.C.: Impact of computer-aided detection in a regional screening mammography program. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 185, 944–950 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Khoo, L.A., Taylor, P., Given-Wilson, R.M.: Computer-aided detection in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Programme: prospective study. Radiology 237, 444–449 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dean, J.C., Ilvento, C.C.: Improved cancer detection using computer-aided detection with diagnostic and screening mammography: prospective study of 104 cancers. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 187, 20–28 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ko, J.M., Nicholas, M.J., Mendel, J.B., Slanetz, P.J.: Prospective Assessment of Computer-Aided Detection in Interpretation of Screening Mammography. Am. J. Roentgenol. 187, 1483–1491 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morton, M.J., Whaley, D.H., Brandt, K.R., Amrami, K.K.: Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection–prospective evaluation. Radiology 239, 375–383 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fenton, J.J., Taplin, S.H., Carney, P.A., Abraham, L., Sickles, E.A., D’Orsi, C., Berns, E.A., Cutter, G., Hendrick, R.E., Barlow, W.E., Elmore, J.G.: Influence of computer-aided detection on performance of screening mammography. The New England Journal of Medicine 356, 1399–1409 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Georgian-Smith, D., Moore, R.H., Halpern, E., Yeh, E.D., Rafferty, E.A., D’Alessandro, H.A., Staffa, M., Hall, D.A., McCarthy, K.A., Kopans, D.B.: Blinded comparison of computer-aided detection with human second reading in screening mammography. AJR Am. J. Roentgenol. 189, 1135–1141 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gilbert, F.J., Astley, S.M., Gillan, M.G., Agbaje, O.F., Wallis, M.G., James, J., Boggis, C.R., Duffy, S.W.: Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography. The New England Journal of Medicine 359, 1675–1684 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gilbert, F.J., Astley, S.M., Gillan, M.G., Agbaje, O.F., Wallis, M.G., James, J., Boggis, C.R., Duffy, S.W.: Single reading with computer-aided detection for screening mammography. The New England Journal of Medicine 359, 1675–1684 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gromet, M.: Comparison of computer-aided detection to double reading of screening mammograms: review of 231,221 mammograms. American Journal of Radiology 190, 854–859 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fenton, J.J., Abraham, L., Taplin, S.H., Geller, B.M., Carney, P.A., D’Orsi, C., Elmore, J.G., Barlow, W.E.: For the Breast Cancer Screening Consortium: Effectiveness of Com-puter-Aided Detection in Community Mammography Practice. JNCI 103, 1152–1161 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ciatto, S., Rosselli Del Turco, M., Burke, P., Visioli, C., Paci, E., Zappa, M.: Comparison of standard and double reading and computer-aided detection (CAD) of interval cancers at prior negative screening mammograms: blind review. British Journal of Cancer 89, 1645–1649 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gilbert, F.J., Astley, S.M., McGee, M.A., Gillan, M.G., Boggis, C.R., Griffiths, P.M., Duffy, S.W.: Single reading with computer-aided detection and double reading of screening mammograms in the United Kingdom National Breast Screening Program. Radiology 241, 47–53 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nishikawa, R., Schmidt, R., Linvers, M., Edwards, A., Papaioannou, J., Stull, M.: Clinically Missed Cancers: How Effectively Can Radiologists Use Computer-Aided Detection (CADe). American Journal of Roentgenology (2011) (in press)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Taylor, P., Champness, J., Given-Wilson, R., Johnston, K., Potts, H.: Impact of computer-aided detection prompts on the sensitivity and specificity of screening mammography. Health Technol. Assess. 9, 1–70 (2005)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nishikawa, R.M., Pesce, L.L.: Computer-aided detection evaluation methods are not created equal. Radiology 251, 634–636 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Taylor, P., Potts, H.W.: Computer aids and human second reading as interventions in screening mammography: two systematic reviews to compare effects on cancer detection and recall rate. Eur. J. Cancer 44, 798–807 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Noble, M., Bruening, W., Uhl, S., Schoelles, K.: Computer-aided detection mammography for breast cancer screening: systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch. Gynecol. Obstet. 279, 881–890 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Eadie, L.H., Taylor, P., Gibson, A.P.: A systematic review of computer-assisted diagnosis in diagnostic cancer imaging. European Journal of Radiology 81, e70–e76 (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hall, F.M.: Breast imaging and computer-aided detection. The New England Journal of Medicine 356, 1464–1466 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert M. Nishikawa
    • 1
  1. 1.Carl J. Vyborny Translational Laboratory for Breast Imaging Research, Department of Radiology, and The Committee on Medical PhysicsThe University of ChicagoChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations