Literature DB >> 20095250

Cumulative sum quality control for calibrated breast density measurements.

John J Heine1, Ke Cao, Craig Beam.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Breast density is a significant breast cancer risk factor. Although various methods are used to estimate breast density, there is no standard measurement for this important factor. The authors are developing a breast density standardization method for use in full field digital mammography (FFDM). The approach calibrates for interpatient acquisition technique differences. The calibration produces a normalized breast density pixel value scale. The method relies on first generating a baseline (BL) calibration dataset, which required extensive phantom imaging. Standardizing prospective mammograms with calibration data generated in the past could introduce unanticipated error in the standardized output if the calibration dataset is no longer valid.
METHODS: Sample points from the BL calibration dataset were imaged approximately biweekly over an extended timeframe. These serial samples were used to evaluate the BL dataset reproducibility and quantify the serial calibration accuracy. The cumulative sum (Cusum) quality control method was used to evaluate the serial sampling.
RESULTS: There is considerable drift in the serial sample points from the BL calibration dataset that is x-ray beam dependent. Systematic deviation from the BL dataset caused significant calibration errors. This system drift was not captured with routine system quality control measures. Cusum analysis indicated that the drift is a sign of system wear and eventual x-ray tube failure.
CONCLUSIONS: The BL calibration dataset must be monitored and periodically updated, when necessary, to account for sustained system variations to maintain the calibration accuracy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20095250      PMCID: PMC2787061          DOI: 10.1118/1.3250842

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  23 in total

1.  Breast cancer. Dissecting a hidden breast cancer risk.

Authors:  Jennifer Couzin
Journal:  Science       Date:  2005-09-09       Impact factor: 47.728

2.  Effective x-ray attenuation measurements with full field digital mammography.

Authors:  John J Heine; Madhusmita Behera
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer.

Authors:  Norman F Boyd; Helen Guo; Lisa J Martin; Limei Sun; Jennifer Stone; Eve Fishell; Roberta A Jong; Greg Hislop; Anna Chiarelli; Salomon Minkin; Martin J Yaffe
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-01-18       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Intelligent information: a national system for monitoring clinical performance.

Authors:  Alex Bottle; Paul Aylin
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.402

5.  Breast density and parenchymal patterns as markers of breast cancer risk: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Valerie A McCormack; Isabel dos Santos Silva
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 4.254

Review 6.  Mammographic breast density as an intermediate phenotype for breast cancer.

Authors:  Norman F Boyd; Johanna M Rommens; Kelly Vogt; Vivian Lee; John L Hopper; Martin J Yaffe; Andrew D Paterson
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 41.316

7.  Projecting absolute invasive breast cancer risk in white women with a model that includes mammographic density.

Authors:  Jinbo Chen; David Pee; Rajeev Ayyagari; Barry Graubard; Catherine Schairer; Celia Byrne; Jacques Benichou; Mitchell H Gail
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2006-09-06       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Evaluating the effectiveness of using standard mammogram form to predict breast cancer risk: case-control study.

Authors:  Jane Ding; Ruth Warren; Iqbal Warsi; Nick Day; Deborah Thompson; Michael Brady; Christopher Tromans; Ralph Highnam; Douglas Easton
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Effective x-ray attenuation coefficient measurements from two full field digital mammography systems for data calibration applications.

Authors:  John J Heine; Jerry A Thomas
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2008-03-28       Impact factor: 2.819

10.  Applying cusum-based methods for the detection of outbreaks of Ross River virus disease in Western Australia.

Authors:  Rochelle E Watkins; Serryn Eagleson; Bert Veenendaal; Graeme Wright; Aileen J Plant
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2008-08-13       Impact factor: 2.796

View more
  15 in total

1.  A novel automated mammographic density measure and breast cancer risk.

Authors:  John J Heine; Christopher G Scott; Thomas A Sellers; Kathleen R Brandt; Daniel J Serie; Fang-Fang Wu; Marilyn J Morton; Beth A Schueler; Fergus J Couch; Janet E Olson; V Shane Pankratz; Celine M Vachon
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2012-07-03       Impact factor: 13.506

2.  Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) breast composition descriptors: automated measurement development for full field digital mammography.

Authors:  E E Fowler; T A Sellers; B Lu; J J Heine
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  Calibrated breast density methods for full field digital mammography: a system for serial quality control and inter-system generalization.

Authors:  B Lu; A M Smallwood; T A Sellers; J S Drukteinis; J J Heine; E E E Fowler
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  Percent Mammographic Density and Dense Area as Risk Factors for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  C Rauh; C C Hack; L Häberle; A Hein; A Engel; M G Schrauder; P A Fasching; S M Jud; A B Ekici; C R Loehberg; M Meier-Meitinger; S Ozan; R Schulz-Wendtland; M Uder; A Hartmann; D L Wachter; M W Beckmann; K Heusinger
Journal:  Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 2.915

5.  Calibrated measures for breast density estimation.

Authors:  John J Heine; Ke Cao; Dana E Rollison
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2011-03-02       Impact factor: 3.173

6.  Generalized breast density metrics.

Authors:  Erin E E Fowler; Autumn Smallwood; Cassandra Miltich; Jennifer Drukteinis; Thomas A Sellers; John Heine
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2018-12-19       Impact factor: 3.609

7.  Calibrated Breast Density Measurements.

Authors:  Erin E Fowler; Autumn Smallwood; Nadia Khan; Cassandra Miltich; Jennifer Drukteinis; Thomas A Sellers; John Heine
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2018-12-10       Impact factor: 3.173

8.  Full field digital mammography and breast density: comparison of calibrated and noncalibrated measurements.

Authors:  John J Heine; Erin E E Fowler; Chris I Flowers
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2011-11       Impact factor: 3.173

9.  A quantitative description of the percentage of breast density measurement using full-field digital mammography.

Authors:  John J Heine; Ke Cao; Dana E Rollison; Gail Tiffenberg; Jerry A Thomas
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 3.173

10.  Automated Percentage of Breast Density Measurements for Full-field Digital Mammography Applications.

Authors:  Erin E E Fowler; Celine M Vachon; Christopher G Scott; Thomas A Sellers; John J Heine
Journal:  Acad Radiol       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.173

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.