Decrease in interpretation time for both novice and experienced readers using a concurrent computer-aided detection system for digital breast tomosynthesis

ObjectivesTo compare the diagnostic performance and interpretation time of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) for both novice and experienced readers with and without using a computer-aided detection (CAD) system for concurrent read.MethodsCAD system was developed for concurrent read in DBT interpretation. In this observer performance study, we used an enriched sample of 100 DBT cases including 70 with and 30 without breast cancers. Image interpretation was performed by four radiologists with different experience levels (two experienced and two novice). Each reader completed two reading sessions (at a minimum 2-month interval), once with and once without CAD. Three different rating scales were used to record each reader’s interpretation. Reader performance with and without CAD was reported and compared for each radiologist. Reading time for each case was also recorded.ResultsAverage area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values for BI-RADS scale on using CAD were 0.778 and 0.776 without using CAD, demonstrating no statistically significant differences. Results were consistent when the probability of malignancy and percentage probability of malignancy scales were used. Reading times per case were 72.07 s and 62.03 s (SD, 37.54 s vs 34.38 s) without and with CAD, respectively. The average difference in reading time on using CAD was a statistically significant decrease of 10.04 ± 1.85 s, providing 14% decrease in time. The time-reducing effect was consistently observed in both novice and experienced readers.ConclusionDBT combined with CAD reduced interpretation time without diagnostic performance loss to novice and experienced readers.Key Points• The use of a concurrent DBT-CAD system shortened interpretation time.• The shortened interpretation time with DBT-CAD did not come at a cost to diagnostic performance to novice or experienced readers.• The concurrent DBT-CAD system improved the efficiency of DBT interpretation.

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

[2]  D. Kopans,et al.  Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: State of the Art. , 2015, Radiology.

[3]  D. Altman,et al.  The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review , 2012, British Journal of Cancer.

[4]  Daniel F Heitjan,et al.  Screening outcomes following implementation of digital breast tomosynthesis in a general-population screening program. , 2014, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[5]  T. M. Kolb,et al.  Comparison of the performance of screening mammography, physical examination, and breast US and evaluation of factors that influence them: an analysis of 27,825 patient evaluations. , 2002, Radiology.

[6]  Richard O. Duda,et al.  Use of the Hough transformation to detect lines and curves in pictures , 1972, CACM.

[7]  Jian Sun,et al.  Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition , 2015, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR).

[8]  E. Halpern,et al.  Assessing radiologist performance using combined digital mammography and breast tomosynthesis compared with digital mammography alone: results of a multicenter, multireader trial. , 2013, Radiology.

[9]  L. Philpotts,et al.  Advances in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis. , 2017, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  C. Balleyguier,et al.  Improving digital breast tomosynthesis reading time: A pilot multi-reader, multi-case study using concurrent Computer-Aided Detection (CAD). , 2017, European journal of radiology.

[11]  S. Astley,et al.  Does Reader Performance with Digital Breast Tomosynthesis Vary according to Experience with Two-dimensional Mammography? , 2017, Radiology.

[12]  Dana H. Ballard,et al.  Generalizing the Hough transform to detect arbitrary shapes , 1981, Pattern Recognit..

[13]  L. Tabár,et al.  Beyond randomized controlled trials , 2001, Cancer.

[14]  Andriy I. Bandos,et al.  Comparison of digital mammography alone and digital mammography plus tomosynthesis in a population-based screening program. , 2013, Radiology.

[15]  S. Ciatto,et al.  Integration of 3D digital mammography with tomosynthesis for population breast-cancer screening (STORM): a prospective comparison study. , 2013, The Lancet. Oncology.

[16]  L. Tabár,et al.  Effect of Baseline Breast Density on Breast Cancer Incidence, Stage, Mortality, and Screening Parameters: 25-Year Follow-up of a Swedish Mammographic Screening , 2010, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

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

[18]  Jennifer A Harvey,et al.  Quantitative assessment of mammographic breast density: relationship with breast cancer risk. , 2004, Radiology.

[19]  Alicia Y Toledano,et al.  Concurrent Computer-Aided Detection Improves Reading Time of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Maintains Interpretation Performance in a Multireader Multicase Study. , 2017, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[20]  Andriy I. Bandos,et al.  Prospective trial comparing full-field digital mammography (FFDM) versus combined FFDM and tomosynthesis in a population-based screening programme using independent double reading with arbitration , 2013, European Radiology.

[21]  Anders Tingberg,et al.  Performance of one-view breast tomosynthesis as a stand-alone breast cancer screening modality: results from the Malmö Breast Tomosynthesis Screening Trial, a population-based study , 2015, European Radiology.

[22]  K. Kerlikowske,et al.  Effect of age, breast density, and family history on the sensitivity of first screening mammography. , 1996, JAMA.

[23]  N. Boyd,et al.  Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  Young-Wook Choi,et al.  A comparison between digital breast tomosynthesis and full-field digital mammography for the detection of breast cancers , 2016, Breast Cancer.

[25]  Pragya A. Dang,et al.  Addition of tomosynthesis to conventional digital mammography: effect on image interpretation time of screening examinations. , 2014, Radiology.

[26]  H. Kim,et al.  Detection and characterization of breast lesions in a selective diagnostic population: diagnostic accuracy study for comparison between one-view digital breast tomosynthesis and two-view full-field digital mammography. , 2016, The British journal of radiology.