Mass detection in breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography: a model observer study

In this study, we adapt and apply model observers within the framework of realistic detection tasks in breast tomosynthesis (BT). We use images consisting of realistic masses digitally embedded in real patient anatomical backgrounds, and we adapt specific model observers that have been previously applied to digital mammography (DM). We design alternative forced-choice experiments (AFC) studies for DM and BT tasks in the signal known exactly but variable (SKEV) framework. We compare performance of various linear model observers (non-prewhitening matched filter with an eye filter, and several channelized Hotelling observers (CHO) against human. A good agreement in performance between human and model observers can be obtained when an appropriate internal noise level is adopted. Models achieve the same detection performance across BT and DM with about three times less projected signal intensity in BT than in DM (humans: 3.8), due to the anatomical noise reduction in BT. We suggest that, in the future, model observers can potentially be used as an objective tool for automating the optimization of BT acquisition parameters or reconstruction algorithms, or narrowing a wide span of possible parameter combinations, without requiring human observers studies.

[1]  Craig K. Abbey,et al.  A Practical Guide to Model Observers for Visual Detection in Synthetic and Natural Noisy Images , 2000 .

[2]  Harold L. Kundel,et al.  Handbook of Medical Imaging, Volume 1. Physics and Psychophysics , 2000 .

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

[4]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Mass detection on mammograms: influence of signal shape uncertainty on human and model observers. , 2009, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[5]  Miguel P. Eckstein,et al.  Automated optimization of JPEG 2000 encoder options based on model observer performance for detecting variable signals in X-ray coronary angiograms , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[6]  Arthur Burgess On the noise variance of a digital mammography system. , 2004, Medical physics.

[7]  Berkman Sahiner,et al.  Computer-aided detection system for breast masses on digital tomosynthesis mammograms: preliminary experience. , 2005, Radiology.

[8]  M P Eckstein,et al.  Visual signal detection in structured backgrounds. III. Calculation of figures of merit for model observers in statistically nonstationary backgrounds. , 2000, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[9]  Joseph Y. Lo,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis using an amorphous selenium flat panel detector , 2005, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[10]  M Ruschin,et al.  Using simple mathematical functions to simulate pathological structures--input for digital mammography clinical trial. , 2005, Radiation protection dosimetry.

[11]  Rebecca Fahrig,et al.  Optimization of a tomosynthesis system for the detection of lung nodules. , 2006, Medical physics.

[12]  Robert M. Nishikawa,et al.  Effect of Scan Angle and Reconstruction Algorithm on Model Observer Performance in Tomosynthesis , 2008, Digital Mammography / IWDM.

[13]  C J D'Orsi,et al.  Comparison of tomosynthesis methods used with digital mammography. , 2000, Academic radiology.

[14]  Cyril Castella,et al.  Human linear template with mammographic backgrounds estimated with a genetic algorithm. , 2007, Journal of the Optical Society of America. A, Optics, image science, and vision.

[15]  F R Verdun,et al.  Estimation of the noisy component of anatomical backgrounds. , 1999, Medical physics.

[16]  Miguel P Eckstein,et al.  Task-based model/human observer evaluation of SPIHT wavelet compression with human visual system-based quantization. , 2005, Academic radiology.