Literature DB >> 19023581

Computer-aided detection mammography for breast cancer screening: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Meredith Noble1, Wendy Bruening, Stacey Uhl, Karen Schoelles.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Mammography is generally accepted as the best available breast cancer screening method; however, some cancers detectable on mammography images are missed. Computer-aided detection (CAD) systems for mammography are intended to reduce false negatives by marking suspicious areas of the mammograms for reviewers to consider. Although the prospect of improving the sensitivity of screening mammograms has led to the diffusion of CAD for mammography, little is known about its diagnostic accuracy.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the diagnostic performance of CAD for screening mammography in terms of sensitivity and specificity and incremental recall, biopsy, and cancer diagnosis rates. DATA SOURCES: Published literature identified by systematic literature searches of 17 databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library, searched through 25 September 2008. STUDY SELECTION: A reviewer and an information specialist selected full-length English-language articles that enrolled asymptomatic women for routine breast cancer screening and provided data needed for our analyses using criteria established a priori. We identified 75 potentially relevant publications, of which 7 (9%) were included. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted and internal validity was assessed by a single review author, and forms were approved by the co-authors.
RESULTS: Three studies (n = 347,324) reported sensitivity and specificity, or data to calculate them, and five studies (n = 51,162) reported data to calculate incremental rates of cancer diagnoses and recall and biopsy of women who did not have breast cancer. The pooled sensitivity was 86.0% (95% CI 84.2-87.6%) and specificity was 88.2% (95% CI 88.1-88.3%). Of the 100,000 women screened, CAD yielded an additional 50 (95% CI 30-80) correct breast cancer diagnoses, 1,190 (95% CI 1,090-1,290) recalls of healthy women, and 80 (95% CI 60-100) biopsies of healthy women. A total of 96% (95% CI 93.9-97.3%) of women recalled based upon CAD and 65.1% (95% CI 52.3-76.0%) of women biopsied based upon CAD were healthy. No studies reported patient-oriented clinical outcomes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19023581     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-008-0841-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.344


  7 in total

1.  Effectiveness of computer-aided detection in community mammography practice.

Authors:  Joshua J Fenton; Linn Abraham; Stephen H Taplin; Berta M Geller; Patricia A Carney; Carl D'Orsi; Joann G Elmore; William E Barlow
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Will machine learning end the viability of radiology as a thriving medical specialty?

Authors:  Stephen Chan; Eliot L Siegel
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 3.  Is the false-positive rate in mammography in North America too high?

Authors:  Michelle T Le; Carmel E Mothersill; Colin B Seymour; Fiona E McNeill
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 3.039

4.  The cost of breast cancer screening in the Medicare population.

Authors:  Cary P Gross; Jessica B Long; Joseph S Ross; Maysa M Abu-Khalaf; Rong Wang; Brigid K Killelea; Heather T Gold; Anees B Chagpar; Xiaomei Ma
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2013-02-11       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 5.  Is single reading with computer-aided detection (CAD) as good as double reading in mammography screening? A systematic review.

Authors:  Edward Azavedo; Sophia Zackrisson; Ingegerd Mejàre; Marianne Heibert Arnlind
Journal:  BMC Med Imaging       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 1.930

6.  Role of Gist and PHOG features in computer-aided diagnosis of tuberculosis without segmentation.

Authors:  Arun Chauhan; Devesh Chauhan; Chittaranjan Rout
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-11-12       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Wavelet-based 3D reconstruction of microcalcification clusters from two mammographic views: new evidence that fractal tumors are malignant and Euclidean tumors are benign.

Authors:  Kendra A Batchelder; Aaron B Tanenbaum; Seth Albert; Lyne Guimond; Pierre Kestener; Alain Arneodo; Andre Khalil
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.