A statistical, task-based evaluation method for three-dimensional x-ray breast imaging systems using variable-background phantoms.

PURPOSE For the last few years, development and optimization of three-dimensional (3D) x-ray breast imaging systems, such as digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and computed tomography, have drawn much attention from the medical imaging community, either academia or industry. However, there is still much room for understanding how to best optimize and evaluate the devices over a large space of many different system parameters and geometries. Current evaluation methods, which work well for 2D systems, do not incorporate the depth information from the 3D imaging systems. Therefore, it is critical to develop a statistically sound evaluation method to investigate the usefulness of inclusion of depth and background-variability information into the assessment and optimization of the 3D systems. METHODS In this paper, we present a mathematical framework for a statistical assessment of planar and 3D x-ray breast imaging systems. Our method is based on statistical decision theory, in particular, making use of the ideal linear observer called the Hotelling observer. We also present a physical phantom that consists of spheres of different sizes and materials for producing an ensemble of randomly varying backgrounds to be imaged for a given patient class. Lastly, we demonstrate our evaluation method in comparing laboratory mammography and three-angle DBT systems for signal detection tasks using the phantom's projection data. We compare the variable phantom case to that of a phantom of the same dimensions filled with water, which we call the uniform phantom, based on the performance of the Hotelling observer as a function of signal size and intensity. RESULTS Detectability trends calculated using the variable and uniform phantom methods are different from each other for both mammography and DBT systems. CONCLUSIONS Our results indicate that measuring the system's detection performance with consideration of background variability may lead to differences in system performance estimates and comparisons. For the assessment of 3D systems, to accurately determine trade offs between image quality and radiation dose, it is critical to incorporate randomness arising from the imaging chain including background variability into system performance calculations.

[1]  J H Siewerdsen,et al.  Anatomical background and generalized detectability in tomosynthesis and cone-beam CT. , 2010, Medical physics.

[2]  John M Boone,et al.  Methodology for generating a 3D computerized breast phantom from empirical data. , 2009, Medical physics.

[3]  H H Barrett,et al.  Addition of a channel mechanism to the ideal-observer model. , 1987, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics and image science.

[4]  Aldo Badano,et al.  Anisotropic imaging performance in breast tomosynthesis. , 2007, Medical physics.

[5]  C. D'Orsi,et al.  Computation of the glandular radiation dose in digital tomosynthesis of the breast. , 2006, Medical physics.

[6]  C. D'Orsi,et al.  Scatter radiation in digital tomosynthesis of the breast. , 2007, Medical physics.

[7]  Ioannis Sechopoulos,et al.  Optimization of the acquisition geometry in digital tomosynthesis of the breast. , 2009, Medical physics.

[8]  Ehsan Samei,et al.  Quantitative imaging in breast tomosynthesis and CT: Comparison of detection and estimation task performance. , 2010, Medical physics.

[9]  Thomas Mertelmeier,et al.  Experimental validation of a three-dimensional linear system model for breast tomosynthesis. , 2008, Medical physics.

[10]  Arthur E Burgess,et al.  Signal detection in power-law noise: effect of spectrum exponents. , 2007, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[11]  Harrison H Barrett,et al.  Validating the use of channels to estimate the ideal linear observer. , 2003, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[12]  Eric Clarkson,et al.  Efficient estimation of ideal-observer performance in classification tasks involving high-dimensional complex backgrounds. , 2009, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[13]  Eric Clarkson,et al.  Hardware assessment using the multi-module, multi-resolution system (M3R): a signal-detection study. , 2007, Medical physics.

[14]  A. Burgess,et al.  Human observer detection experiments with mammograms and power-law noise. , 2001, Medical physics.

[15]  J. Boone,et al.  Evaluation of x-ray scatter properties in a dedicated cone-beam breast CT scanner. , 2005, Medical physics.

[16]  Aldo Badano,et al.  Effect of Oblique X-ray Incidence in Flat-Panel Computed Tomography of the Breast , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[17]  J. Baker,et al.  Can compression be reduced for breast tomosynthesis? Monte carlo study on mass and microcalcification conspicuity in tomosynthesis. , 2009, Radiology.

[18]  Bo Zhao,et al.  A computer simulation platform for the optimization of a breast tomosynthesis system. , 2007, Medical physics.

[19]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  A task-based evaluation method for x-ray breast imaging systems using variable-background phantoms , 2009, Medical Imaging.

[20]  Stephen J. Glick,et al.  Using mastectomy specimens to develop breast models for breast tomosynthesis and CT breast imaging , 2008, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[21]  Kyle J Myers,et al.  An energy- and depth-dependent model for x-ray imaging. , 2004, Medical physics.

[22]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Singular Vectors of a Linear Imaging System as Efficient Channels for the Bayesian Ideal Observer , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[23]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  Development of an anthropomorphic breast software phantom based on region growing algorithm , 2008, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[24]  A. Badano,et al.  A fast, angle-dependent, analytical model of CsI detector response for optimization of 3D x-ray breast imaging systems. , 2010, Medical physics.

[25]  K Bliznakova,et al.  A three-dimensional breast software phantom for mammography simulation. , 2003, Physics in medicine and biology.

[26]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Estimating breast tomosynthesis performance in detection tasks with variable-background phantoms , 2009, Medical Imaging.

[27]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Partial Least Squares: A Method to Estimate Efficient Channels for the Ideal Observers , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[28]  Michael P. Kempston,et al.  Resolution at oblique incidence angles of a flat panel imager for breast tomosynthesis. , 2006, Medical physics.

[29]  R. J. Jennings,et al.  Computational Methods for the Design of Test Objects and Tissue Substitutes for Radiologic Applications , 1993 .

[30]  R M Nishikawa,et al.  Task-based assessment of breast tomosynthesis: effect of acquisition parameters and quantum noise. , 2010, Medical physics.

[31]  Aldo Badano,et al.  penMesh—Monte Carlo Radiation Transport Simulation in a Triangle Mesh Geometry , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[32]  Ian A. Cunningham,et al.  Penalty on the detective quantum efficiency from off-axis incident x rays , 2004, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[33]  R. Jennings,et al.  A method for comparing beam-hardening filter materials for diagnostic radiology. , 1988, Medical physics.

[34]  Aruna A. Vedula,et al.  A computer simulation study comparing lesion detection accuracy with digital mammography, breast tomosynthesis, and cone-beam CT breast imaging. , 2006, Medical physics.

[35]  J. Baker,et al.  A mathematical model platform for optimizing a multiprojection breast imaging system. , 2008, Medical physics.

[36]  J. Boone,et al.  Evaluation of the spatial resolution characteristics of a cone-beam breast CT scanner. , 2006, Medical physics.

[37]  Aldo Badano,et al.  Accelerating Monte Carlo simulations of photon transport in a voxelized geometry using a massively parallel graphics processing unit. , 2009, Medical physics.

[38]  S. Glick,et al.  Evaluation of a variable dose acquisition technique for microcalcification and mass detection in digital breast tomosynthesis. , 2009, Medical physics.

[39]  Samta Thacker,et al.  Evaluating the impact of X-ray spectral shape on image quality in flat-panel CT breast imaging. , 2007, Medical physics.

[40]  J. S. Laughlin,et al.  Absorbed radiation dose in mammography. , 1979, Radiology.

[41]  Kyle J. Myers,et al.  Performance Tradeoffs in a Model Breast Tomosynthesis System , 2010 .

[42]  Wei Zhao,et al.  Three-dimensional linear system analysis for breast tomosynthesis. , 2008, Medical physics.

[43]  Andrew D. A. Maidment,et al.  Mammogram synthesis using a 3D simulation. I. Breast tissue model and image acquisition simulation. , 2002, Medical physics.