Breast cancer detection rates using four different types of mammography detectors

Mackenzie, Alistair; Warren, Lucy M.; Wallis, Matthew; Cooke, Julie; Given-Wilson, Rosalind; Dance, David R.; Chakraborty, Dev P.; Halling‐Brown, Mark; Looney, Pádraig; Young, Kenneth C.

doi:10.1007/s00330-015-3885-y

Cited by 25 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 29 publications

(44 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results demonstrated that the doses for the standard beast were satisfactory and in most cases within the reference levels of 2.5 mGy [2], when analyzed without taking into account the image quality. In particular, the presented results related to CR systems reflecting the necessity to establish procedures for optimisation that require the participation of a medical physicist, radiographers, radiologists and field engineers of both x-ray mammography equipment and CR system used as image receptors [10][11][12]. The physical measures expressing spatial resolution and signal-to-noise ratio are consistent with the published finding that sites employing CR systems had lower image quality [13].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Mammography in Serbia: Image Quality and Radiation Dose

Rafajlovic¹,

Arandjic²,

Bozovic³

et al. 2016

RAD Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The purpose of this study is to investigate the radiation dose and technic in Serbia after two years of implementation of the breast screening programme. A total of 186 mammography units, including Full-Field Digital Mammography (FFDM), (SFM) units were used in the patient Dose (MGD), was assessed for the standard breast, while image quality was evaluated in terms of spatial resolution, threshold contrast visibility and Contrast to (1.8±0.94) mGy, (1.3±0.51) and (1.7±0.64) for CR, FFDM and SFM, respectively. Spatial resolution was better than lp/mm only for 3/186 (1.6%) units. In 34/186 (18%) units, spatial resolution was less tha contrast visibility was better than 1.2 in 41/186 (22%). initial implementation at the beginning of the population establish an effective system of regular and periodic mammograms with minimal possible radiation dose to population

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

Mammography in Serbia: Image Quality and Radiation Dose

Rafajlovic¹,

Arandjic²,

Bozovic³

et al. 2016

RAD Conference Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A virtual clinical trial [10] examined the use of four different types of mammography detector to detect inserted calcification clusters and real non-calcification lesions and is referred to here as the 4-detector observer study. In that trial a set of cases with calcification clusters and malignant non-calcification lesions was prepared and the images converted to appear as if acquired on four different types of detector using methods previously described [11,12].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The observer study [10] used one view (either CC or MLO) of both breasts from 269 cases including normal images (80 cases) and images with non-calcification lesions (80 cases), inserted calcification clusters (80 cases) and biopsy-proven benign lesions (29 cases). The study protocol was approved by the regional research ethics committee.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For simplicity we refer to this as detection. The 4-detector observer study [10] showed no significant differences in the measured FoMs between the a-Se and CsI detectors. For calcification clusters and non-calcification lesions, both CR detectors’ FoMs were significantly lower than for the a-Se and CsI detectors.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The aim of this work is to further investigate the relationship between image quality measurements in European guidelines and the detection of different types of malignant breast lesions using images and data from a published virtual clinical trial [10]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The relationship between cancer detection in mammography and image quality measurements

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To investigate the relationship between image quality measurements and the clinical performance of digital mammographic systems. Methods Mammograms containing subtle malignant non-calcification lesions and simulated malignant calcification clusters were adapted to appear as if acquired by four types of detector. Observers searched for suspicious lesions and gave these a malignancy score. Analysis was undertaken using jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristics weighted figure of merit (FoM). Images of a CDMAM contrast-detail phantom were adapted to appear as if acquired using the same four detectors as the clinical images. The resultant threshold gold thicknesses were compared to the FoMs using a linear regression model and an F-test was used to find if the gradient of the relationship was significantly non-zero. Results The detectors with the best image quality measurement also had the highest FoM values. The gradient of the inverse relationship between FoMs and threshold gold thickness for the 0.25mm diameter disk was significantly different from zero for calcification clusters (p=0.027), but not for non-calcification lesions (p=0.11). Systems performing just above the minimum image quality level set in the European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Breast Cancer Screening and Diagnosis resulted in reduced cancer detection rates compared to systems performing at the achievable level. Conclusions The clinical effectiveness of mammography for the task of detecting calcification clusters was found to be linked to image quality assessment using the CDMAM phantom. The European Guidelines should be reviewed as the current minimum image quality standards may be too low.

show abstract

Toward image quality assessment in mammography using model observers: Detection of a calcification‐like object

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: Model observers (MOs) are of interest in the field of medical imaging to assess image quality. However, before procedures using MOs can be proposed in quality control guidelines for mammography systems, we need to know whether MOs are sensitive to changes in image quality and correlations in background structure. Therefore, as a proof of principle, in this study human and model observer (MO) performance are compared for the detection of calcification-like objects using different background structures and image quality levels of unprocessed mammography images. Method: Three different phantoms, homogeneous polymethyl methacrylate, BR3D slabs with swirled patterns (CIRS, Norfolk, VA, USA), and a prototype anthropomorphic breast phantom (Institute of Medical Physics and Radiation Protection, Technische Hochschule Mittelhessen, Germany) were imaged on an Amulet Innovality (FujiFilm, Tokyo, Japan) mammographic X-ray unit. Because the complexities of the structures of these three phantoms were different and not optimized to match the characteristics of real mammographic images, image processing was not applied in this study. In addition, real mammograms were acquired on the same system. Regions of interest (ROIs) were extracted from each image. In half of the ROIs, a 0.25-mm diameter disk was inserted at four different contrast levels to represent a calcification-like object. Each ROI was then modified, so four image qualities relevant for mammography were simulated. The signal-present and signal-absent ROIs were evaluated by a non-pre-whitening model observer with eye filter (NPWE) and a channelized Hotelling observer (CHO) using dense difference of Gaussian channels. The ROIs were also evaluated by human observers in a two alternative forced choice experiment. Detectability results for the human and model observer experiments were correlated using a mixed-effect regression model. Threshold disk contrasts for human and predicted human observer performance based on the NPWE MO and CHO were estimated. Results: Global trends in threshold contrast were similar for the different background structures, but absolute contrast threshold levels differed. Contrast thresholds tended to be lower in ROIs from simple phantoms compared with ROIs from real mammographic images. The correlation between human and model observer performance was not affected by the range of image quality levels studied. Conclusions: The correlation between human and model observer performance does not depend on image quality. This is a promising outcome for the use of model observers in image quality analysis and allows for subsequent research toward the development of MO-based quality control procedures and guidelines.

show abstract

Breast cancer detection rates using four different types of mammography detectors

Cited by 25 publications

References 29 publications

Mammography in Serbia: Image Quality and Radiation Dose

Mammography in Serbia: Image Quality and Radiation Dose

The relationship between cancer detection in mammography and image quality measurements

Toward image quality assessment in mammography using model observers: Detection of a calcification‐like object

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About