Localized detection and classification of abnormalities on FFDM and tomosynthesis examinations rated under an FROC paradigm.

OBJECTIVE The purpose of our study was to assess diagnostic performance when retrospectively interpreting full-field digital mammography (FFDM) and breast tomosynthesis examinations under a free-response receiver operating characteristic (FROC) paradigm. MATERIALS AND METHODS We performed FROC analysis of a previously reported study in which eight experienced radiologists interpreted 125 examinations, including 35 with verified cancers. The FROC paradigm involves detecting, locating, and rating each suspected abnormality. Radiologists reviewed and rated both FFDM alone and a combined display mode of FFDM and digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) (combined). Observer performance levels were assessed and compared with respect to the fraction of correctly identified abnormalities, the number of reported location-specific findings (both true and false), and their associated ratings. The analysis accounts for the number and locations of findings and the location-based ratings using a summary performance index (Λ), which is the FROC analog of the area between the receiver operating characteristic curve and the diagonal (chance) line. RESULTS Under the FROC paradigm, each reader detected more true abnormalities associated with cancer, or a higher true-positive fraction, under the combined mode. In an analysis focused on both the number of findings and associated location-based ratings, each of the radiologists performed better under the combined mode compared with FFDM alone, with increases in Λ ranging from 5% to 34%. On average, under the combined mode radiologists achieved a 16% improvement in Λ compared with the FFDM alone mode (95% CI, 7-26%; p < 0.01). CONCLUSION We showed that DBT-based breast imaging in combination with FFDM could result in better performance under the FROC paradigm.

[1]  L T Niklason,et al.  Digital breast imaging: tomosynthesis and digital subtraction mammography. , 1998, Breast disease.

[2]  R A Schmidt,et al.  Automated detection of microcalcification clusters for digital breast tomosynthesis using projection data only: a preliminary study. , 2008, Medical physics.

[3]  C. Waldherr,et al.  Value of one-view breast tomosynthesis versus two-view mammography in diagnostic workup of women with clinical signs and symptoms and in women recalled from screening. , 2013, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[4]  David Gur,et al.  Dose reduction in digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) screening using synthetically reconstructed projection images: an observer performance study. , 2012, Academic radiology.

[5]  Loren Niklason,et al.  Advanced applications of digital mammography: tomosynthesis and contrast-enhanced digital mammography. , 2007, Seminars in roentgenology.

[6]  David Gur,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: observer performance study. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  David Gur,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis versus supplemental diagnostic mammographic views for evaluation of noncalcified breast lesions. , 2013, Radiology.

[8]  David Gur,et al.  Area under the Free‐Response ROC Curve (FROC) and a Related Summary Index , 2009, Biometrics.

[9]  R. Edward Hendrick,et al.  Performance comparison of single-view digital breast tomosynthesis plus single-view digital mammography with two-view digital mammography , 2013, European Radiology.

[10]  Adam Wunderlich,et al.  A Nonparametric Procedure for Comparing the Areas Under Correlated LROC Curves , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Medical Imaging.

[11]  Tor D Tosteson,et al.  Digital breast tomosynthesis: initial experience in 98 women with abnormal digital screening mammography. , 2007, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[12]  D. Kopans,et al.  Digital tomosynthesis in breast imaging. , 1997, Radiology.

[13]  Elizabeth A Rafferty,et al.  Digital mammography: novel applications. , 2007, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[14]  Dev P Chakraborty,et al.  Observer studies involving detection and localization: modeling, analysis, and validation. , 2004, Medical physics.

[15]  C J D'Orsi,et al.  Evaluation of linear and nonlinear tomosynthetic reconstruction methods in digital mammography. , 2001, Academic radiology.

[16]  Andrew Smith,et al.  Full-field breast tomosynthesis. , 2005, Radiology management.

[17]  Tao Wu,et al.  A comparison of reconstruction algorithms for breast tomosynthesis. , 2004, Medical physics.

[18]  R. L. Birdwell Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: A Pilot Observer Study , 2009 .