Literature DB >> 20082226

"CADEAT": considerations on the use of CAD (computer-aided diagnosis) in mammography.

R Chersevani, S Ciatto, C Del Favero, A Frigerio, L Giordano, G Giuseppetti, C Naldoni, P Panizza, M Petrella, G Saguatti.   

Abstract

Computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) has been extensively reported to increase sensitivity by about 10% when added to a single reading while increasing recall rate by 12%, and its current use can be safely recommended in clinical practice. CAD has been suggested as a possible alternative to conventional double reading in screening. Uncontrolled comparison is consistent and suggests that CAD is comparable to double reading in incremental cancer detection rate (CAD +10.6%, double reading +9.1%) and possibly better in recall rate (CAD +12.5%, double reading +28.8%). However, controlled studies comparing single reading + CAD to conventional double reading are not consistent and on average suggest a lower cancer detection rate (-5.1%) and a lower recall rate (-9.8%) for CAD. Scientific evidence is not sufficient for a safe recommendation of single reading + CAD as a current alternative to conventional double reading.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20082226     DOI: 10.1007/s11547-010-0505-4

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiol Med        ISSN: 0033-8362            Impact factor:   3.469


  27 in total

1.  Computer-aided detection with screening mammography in a university hospital setting.

Authors:  Robyn L Birdwell; Parul Bandodkar; Debra M Ikeda
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Impact of computer-aided detection in a regional screening mammography program.

Authors:  Tommy E Cupples; Joan E Cunningham; James C Reynolds
Journal:  AJR Am J Roentgenol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.959

3.  Incremental cost-effectiveness of double-reading mammograms.

Authors:  T Leivo; T Salminen; H Sintonen; R Tuominen; K Auerma; K Partanen; U Saari; M Hakama; O P Heinonen
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  1999-04       Impact factor: 4.872

4.  Second reading of screening mammograms increases cancer detection and recall rates. Results in the Florence screening programme.

Authors:  S Ciatto; D Ambrogetti; R Bonardi; S Catarzi; G Risso; M Rosselli Del Turco; P Mantellini
Journal:  J Med Screen       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.136

5.  Computer-aided detection versus independent double reading of masses on mammograms.

Authors:  Nico Karssemeijer; Johannes D M Otten; Andre L M Verbeek; Johanna H Groenewoud; Harry J de Koning; Jan H C L Hendriks; Roland Holland
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2003-02-28       Impact factor: 11.105

6.  Computer-assisted diagnosis (CAD) in mammography: comparison of diagnostic accuracy of a new algorithm (Cyclopus, Medicad) with two commercial systems.

Authors:  S Ciatto; D Cascio; F Fauci; R Magro; G Raso; R Ienzi; F Martinelli; M Vasile Simone
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2009-05-14       Impact factor: 3.469

7.  Comparison of two commercial systems for computer-assisted detection (CAD) as an aid to interpreting screening mammograms.

Authors:  Stefano Ciatto; Daniela Ambrogetti; Rita Bonardi; Beniamino Brancato; Sandra Catarzi; Gabriella Risso; Marco Rosselli Del Turco
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2004 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.469

8.  Sensitivity of noncommercial computer-aided detection system for mammographic breast cancer detection: pilot clinical trial.

Authors:  Mark A Helvie; Lubomir Hadjiiski; Erini Makariou; Heang-Ping Chan; Nicholas Petrick; Berkman Sahiner; Shih-Chung B Lo; Matthew Freedman; Dorit Adler; Janet Bailey; Caroline Blane; Donna Hoff; Karen Hunt; Lynn Joynt; Katherine Klein; Chintana Paramagul; Stephanie K Patterson; Marilyn A Roubidoux
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2004-02-27       Impact factor: 11.105

9.  Benefit of independent double reading in a population-based mammography screening program.

Authors:  E L Thurfjell; K A Lernevall; A A Taube
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Comparison of standard reading and computer aided diagnosis (CAD) on a proficiency test of screening mammography.

Authors:  Stefano Ciatto; Beniamino Brancato; Marco Rosselli Del Turco; Gabriella Risso; Sandra Catarzi; Daniela Morrone; Daniela Bricolo; Marco Zappa
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2003 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 3.469

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  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

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.