Literature DB >> 11387148

Geographical distribution of breast cancers on the mammogram: an interval cancer database.

M Brown1, C Eccles, M G Wallis.   

Abstract

Auditing interval cancers is an important part of a breast screening radiologist's continuing education. We set out to determine whether the position of interval cancers on the mammogram differs from those detected at screening. The 773 interval cancers so far identified, and the first 200 screen detected cancers, have been entered onto a Microsoft Access 97 database developed to record pathological and radiological features, including the position of the cancer on a stylized diagram using a "point and click" system. Reports were generated showing positions of all interval cancers by classification and reader. The distribution of true interval cancers is statistically different from screen detected cancers on both views. The distribution of the false negative and screen detected cancers only differs on the oblique view. False negative and true interval cancers are of the same distribution on both craniocaudal and oblique views. However, these differences do not appear to be practically useful when applied to individual readers. We have developed a database that allows systematic recording of pathological and radiological information regarding breast cancers. Additionally, it can record the geographic position of the cancer with minimal memory requirements. Statistical differences in the distribution of false negative and screen detected cancers have been demonstrated and the stylized diagrams reinforce the importance of the conventional review areas. Although this has not identified any "blind spots" in our own readers, it nevertheless provides film readers with a tool to audit their own work.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11387148     DOI: 10.1259/bjr.74.880.740317

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Radiol        ISSN: 0007-1285            Impact factor:   3.039


  4 in total

1.  Mammography in females with an implanted medical device: impact on image quality, pain and anxiety.

Authors:  Ellen Paap; Marloes Witjes; Cary van Landsveld-Verhoeven; Ruud M Pijnappel; Angela H E M Maas; Mireille J M Broeders
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 3.039

2.  Computer-aided detection of breast carcinoma in standard mammographic projections with digital mammography.

Authors:  Stamatia Destounis; Sarah Hanson; Renee Morgan; Philip Murphy; Patricia Somerville; Posy Seifert; Valerie Andolina; Andrea Arieno; Melissa Skolny; Wende Logan-Young
Journal:  Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg       Date:  2009-04-15       Impact factor: 2.924

3.  Using GIS in a first national mapping of functional disability among older American Indians and Alaska Natives from the 2000 census.

Authors:  Margaret P Moss; Matthew C Schell; R Turner Goins
Journal:  Int J Health Geogr       Date:  2006-09-01       Impact factor: 3.918

4.  Comparison of a flexible versus a rigid breast compression paddle: pain experience, projected breast area, radiation dose and technical image quality.

Authors:  Mireille J M Broeders; Marloes Ten Voorde; Wouter J H Veldkamp; Ruben E van Engen; Cary van Landsveld-Verhoeven; Machteld N L 't Jong-Gunneman; Jos de Win; Kitty Droogh-de Greve; Ellen Paap; Gerard J den Heeten
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 5.315

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.