Accuracy of Cyst Versus Solid Diagnosis in the Breast Using Quantitative Transmission (QT) Ultrasound

Rational and Objectives This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic utility of breast imaging using transmission ultrasound. We present readers’ accuracy in determining whether a breast lesion is a cyst versus a solid using transmission ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography. Materials and Methods This retrospective multi-reader, multi-case receiver operating characteristic study included 37 lesions seen on mammography and transmission ultrasound. Cyst cases were confirmed as cysts using their appearance on handheld ultrasound. Solid cases were confirmed as solids with pathology results. Fourteen readers performed blinded, randomized reads with mammog-raphy + quantitative transmission scan images, assigning both a confidence score (0–100) and a binary classification of cyst or solid. A 95% percentile bootstrap confidence interval (CI) was computed for the readers’ mean receiver operating characteristic area, sensitivity, and specificity. Results Using the readers’ binary classification of cyst or solid lesions, the mean sensitivity and specificity were 0.933 [95% CI: 0.837, 0.995] and 0.858 [95% CI: 0.701, 0.985], respectively. When the readers’ confidence scores were used to distinguish a cyst versus solid, the mean receiver operating characteristic area was 0.920 [95% CI: 0.827, 0.985]. Conclusions Transmission ultrasound can provide an accurate assessment of a cyst versus a solid lesion in the breast. Prospective clinical trials will further delineate the role of transmission ultrasound as an adjunct to mammography to increase specificity in breast evaluation.

[1]  Linda K. Olson,et al.  Quantitative volumetric breast imaging with 3D inverse scatter computed tomography , 2012, 2012 Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.

[2]  D. Borup,et al.  Non-linear inverse scattering: high resolution quantitative breast tissue tomography. , 2012, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[3]  E. Pisano,et al.  Consequences of false-positive screening mammograms. , 2014, JAMA internal medicine.

[4]  L. Bonomo,et al.  Cystic Breast Lesions , 2010, Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.

[5]  Jean B. Cormack,et al.  Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. , 2008, JAMA.

[6]  Matthew A. Lewis,et al.  Imaging Performance of Quantitative Transmission Ultrasound , 2015, Int. J. Biomed. Imaging.

[7]  Wendie A Berg,et al.  Cystic breast masses and the ACRIN 6666 experience. , 2010, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[8]  Ahmad Chaddad,et al.  Automated Feature Extraction in Brain Tumor by Magnetic Resonance Imaging Using Gaussian Mixture Models , 2015, Int. J. Biomed. Imaging.

[9]  J. Harvey,et al.  Short-term follow-up of palpable breast lesions with benign imaging features: evaluation of 375 lesions in 320 women. , 2009, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  K. Mandl,et al.  National expenditure for false-positive mammograms and breast cancer overdiagnoses estimated at $4 billion a year. , 2015, Health affairs.

[11]  John Brodersen,et al.  Long-Term Psychosocial Consequences of False-Positive Screening Mammography , 2013, The Annals of Family Medicine.

[12]  E. Gerson Screening breast sonography. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[13]  Bilal H. Malik,et al.  Objective breast tissue image classification using Quantitative Transmission ultrasound tomography , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[14]  N A Obuchowski,et al.  Nonparametric analysis of clustered ROC curve data. , 1997, Biometrics.

[15]  Nancy A. Obuchowski,et al.  Anatomy-Correlated Breast Imaging and Visual Grading Analysis Using Quantitative Transmission Ultrasound™ , 2016, Int. J. Biomed. Imaging.

[16]  M. Helvie,et al.  Complicated breast cysts on sonography: is aspiration necessary to exclude malignancy? , 2008, Academic radiology.