Screening mammograms: interpretation with computer-aided detection--prospective evaluation.

PURPOSE To prospectively determine the effect of a commercially available computer-aided detection (CAD) system on interpretations of screening mammograms. MATERIALS AND METHODS Institutional review board approval was granted; informed consent and HIPAA compliance were waived. A total of 21 349 screening mammograms obtained in 18 096 women were interpreted first without and then with review of CAD images to determine the effect of CAD analysis on the screening breast cancer detection rate, recall rate, and positive predictive value (PPV) for biopsy. The percentage of total cancers detected by the radiologists independent of CAD and the percentage correctly marked by the CAD system were determined. RESULTS On the basis of pre-CAD interpretations, 2101 patients were recalled for diagnostic evaluation, 256 biopsies were performed, and 105 breast cancers were diagnosed. The breast cancer detection rate per 1000 screening mammograms was 4.92 (105 of 21 349 mammograms), the recall rate was 9.84% (2101 of 21 349 mammograms), and the PPV for biopsy was 41.0% (105 of 256 biopsies). After CAD image review, 199 additional patients were recalled, 21 additional biopsies were performed, and eight additional cancers were detected. The effect was a 7.62% (eight of 105) increase in the number of breast cancers detected, an increase in the recall rate to 10.77% (2300 of 21 349 mammograms), and a slight decrease in the PPV to 40.8% (113 of 277 biopsies). Radiologists detected 92.9% (105 of 113 cancers) of the total cancers, and CAD correctly marked 76.1% (86 of 113 cancers). CONCLUSION The use of CAD improved the detection of breast cancer, with an acceptable increase in the recall rate and a minimal increase in the number of biopsies with benign results.

[1]  W. Simpson,et al.  Proportion of cancers detected at the first incident screen which were false negative at the prevalent screen , 1996 .

[2]  F. Winsberg,et al.  Detection of Radiographic Abnormalities in Mammograms by Means of Optical Scanning and Computer Analysis , 1967 .

[3]  Melanie Pinet,et al.  Increase in cancer detection and recall rates with independent double interpretation of screening mammography. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

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

[5]  L. Fajardo,et al.  Previous mammograms in patients with impalpable breast carcinoma: retrospective vs blinded interpretation. 1993 ARRS President's Award. , 1993, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[6]  M J Schell,et al.  Reassessment of breast cancers missed during routine screening mammography: a community-based study. , 2001, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[7]  Berkman Sahiner,et al.  Breast cancer detection: evaluation of a mass-detection algorithm for computer-aided diagnosis -- experience in 263 patients. , 2002, Radiology.

[8]  G. P. Cohen,et al.  Characteristics of breast carcinomas missed by screening radiologists. , 1997, Radiology.

[9]  K. Kerlikowske,et al.  Variability and accuracy in mammographic interpretation using the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. , 1998, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[10]  W. P. Evans,et al.  Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic characteristics and computer-aided detection. , 2002, Radiology.

[11]  T. Freer,et al.  Screening mammography with computer-aided detection: prospective study of 12,860 patients in a community breast center. , 2001, Radiology.

[12]  R. Bird,et al.  Analysis of cancers missed at screening mammography. , 1992, Radiology.

[13]  L. Tabár,et al.  The impact of organized mammography service screening on breast carcinoma mortality in seven Swedish counties , 2002, Cancer.

[14]  S. Woolf,et al.  Breast Cancer Screening: A Summary of the Evidence for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force , 2002, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[15]  D. Ikeda,et al.  Mammographic characteristics of 115 missed cancers later detected with screening mammography and the potential utility of computer-aided detection. , 2001, Radiology.

[16]  Roland Holland,et al.  The current detectability of breast cancer in a mammographic screening program. A review of the previous mammograms of interval and screen‐detected cancers , 1993, Cancer.

[17]  J. Baker,et al.  Computer-aided detection (CAD) in screening mammography: sensitivity of commercial CAD systems for detecting architectural distortion. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[18]  C. Vyborny,et al.  Breast cancer: importance of spiculation in computer-aided detection. , 2000, Radiology.

[19]  Debra M Ikeda,et al.  Analysis of 172 subtle findings on prior normal mammograms in women with breast cancer detected at follow-up screening. , 2003, Radiology.

[20]  S. Duffy,et al.  Comparison of single reading with double reading of mammograms, and change in effectiveness with experience. , 1995, The British journal of radiology.

[21]  L. Tabár,et al.  Efficacy of breast cancer screening by age. New results swedish two‐county trial , 1995, Cancer.

[22]  Kathleen M. Harris,et al.  Analysis of False‐Negative Cancer Cases Identified with a Mammography Audit , 1999, The breast journal.

[23]  L. Tabár,et al.  Potential contribution of computer-aided detection to the sensitivity of screening mammography. , 2000, Radiology.

[24]  B. Muir,et al.  The efficacy of double reading mammograms in breast screening. , 1994, Clinical radiology.

[25]  Rachel F Brem,et al.  Improvement in sensitivity of screening mammography with computer-aided detection: a multiinstitutional trial. , 2003, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[26]  E. Thurfjell,et al.  Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program. , 1994, Radiology.