Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 44
Filter
Add more filters

Country/Region as subject
Publication year range
1.
Nature ; 577(7788): 89-94, 2020 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31894144

ABSTRACT

Screening mammography aims to identify breast cancer at earlier stages of the disease, when treatment can be more successful1. Despite the existence of screening programmes worldwide, the interpretation of mammograms is affected by high rates of false positives and false negatives2. Here we present an artificial intelligence (AI) system that is capable of surpassing human experts in breast cancer prediction. To assess its performance in the clinical setting, we curated a large representative dataset from the UK and a large enriched dataset from the USA. We show an absolute reduction of 5.7% and 1.2% (USA and UK) in false positives and 9.4% and 2.7% in false negatives. We provide evidence of the ability of the system to generalize from the UK to the USA. In an independent study of six radiologists, the AI system outperformed all of the human readers: the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) for the AI system was greater than the AUC-ROC for the average radiologist by an absolute margin of 11.5%. We ran a simulation in which the AI system participated in the double-reading process that is used in the UK, and found that the AI system maintained non-inferior performance and reduced the workload of the second reader by 88%. This robust assessment of the AI system paves the way for clinical trials to improve the accuracy and efficiency of breast cancer screening.


Subject(s)
Artificial Intelligence/standards , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Early Detection of Cancer/standards , Female , Humans , Mammography/standards , Reproducibility of Results , United Kingdom , United States
2.
Eur Radiol ; 32(2): 806-814, 2022 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34331118

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare the detection of subtle lesions (calcification clusters or masses) when using the combination of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) and synthetic mammography (SM) with digital mammography (DM) alone or combined with DBT. METHODS: A set of 166 cases without cancer was acquired on a DBT mammography system. Realistic subtle calcification clusters and masses in the DM images and DBT planes were digitally inserted into 104 of the acquired cases. Three study arms were created: DM alone, DM with DBT and SM with DBT. Five mammographic readers located the centre of any lesion within the images that should be recalled for further investigation and graded their suspiciousness. A JAFROC figure of merit (FoM) and lesion detection fraction (LDF) were calculated for each study arm. The visibility of the lesions in the DBT images was compared with SM and DM images. RESULTS: For calcification clusters, there were no significant differences (p > 0.075) in FoM or LDF. For masses, the FoM and LDF were significantly improved in the arms using DBT compared to DM alone (p < 0.001). On average, both calcification clusters and masses were more visible on DBT than on DM and SM images. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that masses were detected better with DBT than with DM alone and there was no significant difference (p = 0.075) in LDF between DM&DBT and SM&DBT for calcifications clusters. Our results support previous studies that it may be acceptable to not acquire digital mammography alongside tomosynthesis for subtle calcification clusters and ill-defined masses. KEY POINTS: • The detection of masses was significantly better using DBT than with digital mammography alone. • The detection of calcification clusters was not significantly different between digital mammography and synthetic 2D images combined with tomosynthesis. • Our results support previous studies that it may be acceptable to not acquire digital mammography alongside tomosynthesis for subtle calcification clusters and ill-defined masses for the imaging technology used.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Calcinosis , Neoplasms , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Calcinosis/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Mammography
3.
Br J Cancer ; 125(6): 884-892, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34168297

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This study investigates whether quantitative breast density (BD) serves as an imaging biomarker for more intensive breast cancer screening by predicting interval, and node-positive cancers. METHODS: This case-control study of 1204 women aged 47-73 includes 599 cancer cases (302 screen-detected, 297 interval; 239 node-positive, 360 node-negative) and 605 controls. Automated BD software calculated fibroglandular volume (FGV), volumetric breast density (VBD) and density grade (DG). A radiologist assessed BD using a visual analogue scale (VAS) from 0 to 100. Logistic regression and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) determined whether BD could predict mode of detection (screen-detected or interval); node-negative cancers; node-positive cancers, and all cancers vs. controls. RESULTS: FGV, VBD, VAS, and DG all discriminated interval cancers (all p < 0.01) from controls. Only FGV-quartile discriminated screen-detected cancers (p < 0.01). Based on AUC, FGV discriminated all cancer types better than VBD or VAS. FGV showed a significantly greater discrimination of interval cancers, AUC = 0.65, than of screen-detected cancers, AUC = 0.61 (p < 0.01) as did VBD (0.63 and 0.53, respectively, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: FGV, VBD, VAS and DG discriminate interval cancers from controls, reflecting some masking risk. Only FGV discriminates screen-detected cancers perhaps adding a unique component of breast cancer risk.


Subject(s)
Breast Density , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Mammography/methods , Aged , Case-Control Studies , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Visual Analog Scale
5.
Eur Radiol ; 26(3): 874-83, 2016 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26105023

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To compare the performance of different types of detectors in breast cancer detection. METHODS: A mammography image set containing subtle malignant non-calcification lesions, biopsy-proven benign lesions, simulated malignant calcification clusters and normals was acquired using amorphous-selenium (a-Se) detectors. The images were adapted to simulate four types of detectors at the same radiation dose: digital radiography (DR) detectors with a-Se and caesium iodide (CsI) convertors, and computed radiography (CR) detectors with a powder phosphor (PIP) and a needle phosphor (NIP). Seven observers marked suspicious and benign lesions. Analysis was undertaken using jackknife alternative free-response receiver operating characteristics weighted figure of merit (FoM). The cancer detection fraction (CDF) was estimated for a representative image set from screening. RESULTS: No significant differences in the FoMs between the DR detectors were measured. For calcification clusters and non-calcification lesions, both CR detectors' FoMs were significantly lower than for DR detectors. The calcification cluster's FoM for CR NIP was significantly better than for CR PIP. The estimated CDFs with CR PIP and CR NIP detectors were up to 15% and 22% lower, respectively, than for DR detectors. CONCLUSION: Cancer detection is affected by detector type, and the use of CR in mammography should be reconsidered. KEY POINTS: The type of mammography detector can affect the cancer detection rates. CR detectors performed worse than DR detectors in mammography. Needle phosphor CR performed better than powder phosphor CR. Calcification clusters detection is more sensitive to detector type than other cancers.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Calcinosis/diagnostic imaging , Mammography/instrumentation , Aged , Early Detection of Cancer/instrumentation , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Female , Humans , Mammography/methods , Mass Screening/instrumentation , Mass Screening/methods , Middle Aged , Needles , Observer Variation , ROC Curve , Radiographic Image Enhancement/methods
6.
Radiology ; 277(3): 697-706, 2015 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26176654

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic performance of two-dimensional (2D) mammography, 2D mammography plus digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), and synthetic 2D mammography plus DBT in depicting malignant radiographic features. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, multireader, retrospective reading study (the TOMMY trial), after written informed consent was obtained, 8869 women (age range, 29-85 years; mean, 56 years) were recruited from July 2011 to March 2013 in an ethically approved study. From these women, a reading dataset of 7060 cases was randomly allocated for independent blinded review of (a) 2D mammography images, (b) 2D mammography plus DBT images, and (c) synthetic 2D mammography plus DBT images. Reviewers had no access to results of previous examinations. Overall sensitivities and specificities were calculated for younger women and those with dense breasts. RESULTS: Overall sensitivity was 87% for 2D mammography, 89% for 2D mammography plus DBT, and 88% for synthetic 2D mammography plus DBT. The addition of DBT was associated with a 34% increase in the odds of depicting cancer (odds ratio [OR] = 1.34, P = .06); however, this level did not achieve significance. For patients aged 50-59 years old, sensitivity was significantly higher (P = .01) for 2D mammography plus DBT than it was for 2D mammography. For those with breast density of 50% or more, sensitivity was 86% for 2D mammography compared with 93% for 2D mammography plus DBT (P = .03). Specificity was 57% for 2D mammography, 70% for 2D mammography plus DBT, and 72% for synthetic 2D mammography plusmDBT. Specificity was significantly higher than 2D mammography (P < .001in both cases) and was observed for all subgroups (P < .001 for all cases). CONCLUSION: The addition of DBT increased the sensitivity of 2D mammography in patients with dense breasts and the specificity of 2D mammography for all subgroups. The use of synthetic 2D DBT demonstrated performance similar to that of standard 2D mammography with DBT. DBT is of potential benefit to screening programs, particularly in younger women with dense breasts. (©) RSNA, 2015.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods , Mammography/methods , Adult , Aged , Diagnostic Errors , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , ROC Curve , Retrospective Studies , United Kingdom
7.
AJR Am J Roentgenol ; 203(2): 387-93, 2014 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25055275

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE. The objective of our study was to investigate the effect of image processing on the detection of cancers in digital mammography images. MATERIALS AND METHODS. Two hundred seventy pairs of breast images (both breasts, one view) were collected from eight systems using Hologic amorphous selenium detectors: 80 image pairs showed breasts containing subtle malignant masses; 30 image pairs, biopsy-proven benign lesions; 80 image pairs, simulated calcification clusters; and 80 image pairs, no cancer (normal). The 270 image pairs were processed with three types of image processing: standard (full enhancement), low contrast (intermediate enhancement), and pseudo-film-screen (no enhancement). Seven experienced observers inspected the images, locating and rating regions they suspected to be cancer for likelihood of malignancy. The results were analyzed using a jackknife-alternative free-response receiver operating characteristic (JAFROC) analysis. RESULTS. The detection of calcification clusters was significantly affected by the type of image processing: The JAFROC figure of merit (FOM) decreased from 0.65 with standard image processing to 0.63 with low-contrast image processing (p = 0.04) and from 0.65 with standard image processing to 0.61 with film-screen image processing (p = 0.0005). The detection of noncalcification cancers was not significantly different among the image-processing types investigated (p > 0.40). CONCLUSION. These results suggest that image processing has a significant impact on the detection of calcification clusters in digital mammography. For the three image-processing versions and the system investigated, standard image processing was optimal for the detection of calcification clusters. The effect on cancer detection should be considered when selecting the type of image processing in the future.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Calcinosis/diagnostic imaging , Mammography/methods , Radiographic Image Enhancement/methods , Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted/methods , Aged , Biopsy , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , United Kingdom
8.
Radiol Artif Intell ; 6(4): e230431, 2024 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38775671

ABSTRACT

Purpose To develop an artificial intelligence (AI) deep learning tool capable of predicting future breast cancer risk from a current negative screening mammographic examination and to evaluate the model on data from the UK National Health Service Breast Screening Program. Materials and Methods The OPTIMAM Mammography Imaging Database contains screening data, including mammograms and information on interval cancers, for more than 300 000 female patients who attended screening at three different sites in the United Kingdom from 2012 onward. Cancer-free screening examinations from women aged 50-70 years were performed and classified as risk-positive or risk-negative based on the occurrence of cancer within 3 years of the original examination. Examinations with confirmed cancer and images containing implants were excluded. From the resulting 5264 risk-positive and 191 488 risk-negative examinations, training (n = 89 285), validation (n = 2106), and test (n = 39 351) datasets were produced for model development and evaluation. The AI model was trained to predict future cancer occurrence based on screening mammograms and patient age. Performance was evaluated on the test dataset using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and compared across subpopulations to assess potential biases. Interpretability of the model was explored, including with saliency maps. Results On the hold-out test set, the AI model achieved an overall AUC of 0.70 (95% CI: 0.69, 0.72). There was no evidence of a difference in performance across the three sites, between patient ethnicities, or across age groups. Visualization of saliency maps and sample images provided insights into the mammographic features associated with AI-predicted cancer risk. Conclusion The developed AI tool showed good performance on a multisite, United Kingdom-specific dataset. Keywords: Deep Learning, Artificial Intelligence, Breast Cancer, Screening, Risk Prediction Supplemental material is available for this article. ©RSNA, 2024.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Deep Learning , Early Detection of Cancer , Mammography , Humans , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Female , United Kingdom/epidemiology , Middle Aged , Mammography/methods , Aged , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Risk Assessment/methods , Mass Screening/methods , Cohort Studies
9.
Br J Radiol ; 96(1143): 20211104, 2023 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36607283

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: To pilot a process for the independent external validation of an artificial intelligence (AI) tool to detect breast cancer using data from the NHS breast screening programme (NHSBSP). METHODS: A representative data set of mammography images from 26,000 women attending 2 NHS screening centres, and an enriched data set of 2054 positive cases were used from the OPTIMAM image database. The use case of the AI tool was the replacement of the first or second human reader. The performance of the AI tool was compared to that of human readers in the NHSBSP. RESULTS: Recommendations for future external validations of AI tools to detect breast cancer are provided. The tool recalled different breast cancers to the human readers. This study showed the importance of testing AI tools on all types of cases (including non-standard) and the clarity of any warning messages. The acceptable difference in sensitivity and specificity between the AI tool and human readers should be determined. Any information vital for the clinical application should be a required output for the AI tool. It is recommended that the interaction of radiologists with the AI tool, and the effect of the AI tool on arbitration be investigated prior to clinical use. CONCLUSION: This pilot demonstrated several lessons for future independent external validation of AI tools for breast cancer detection. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Knowledge has been gained towards best practice procedures for performing independent external validations of AI tools for the detection of breast cancer using data from the NHS Breast Screening Programme.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Female , Humans , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Artificial Intelligence , Mammography/methods , Breast/diagnostic imaging , United Kingdom , Early Detection of Cancer/methods , Retrospective Studies
10.
Med Phys ; 39(5): 2721-34, 2012 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22559643

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Undertaking observer studies to compare imaging technology using clinical radiological images is challenging due to patient variability. To achieve a significant result, a large number of patients would be required to compare cancer detection rates for different image detectors and systems. The aim of this work was to create a methodology where only one set of images is collected on one particular imaging system. These images are then converted to appear as if they had been acquired on a different detector and x-ray system. Therefore, the effect of a wide range of digital detectors on cancer detection or diagnosis can be examined without the need for multiple patient exposures. METHODS: Three detectors and x-ray systems [Hologic Selenia (ASE), GE Essential (CSI), Carestream CR (CR)] were characterized in terms of signal transfer properties, noise power spectra (NPS), modulation transfer function, and grid properties. The contributions of the three noise sources (electronic, quantum, and structure noise) to the NPS were calculated by fitting a quadratic polynomial at each spatial frequency of the NPS against air kerma. A methodology was developed to degrade the images to have the characteristics of a different (target) imaging system. The simulated images were created by first linearizing the original images such that the pixel values were equivalent to the air kerma incident at the detector. The linearized image was then blurred to match the sharpness characteristics of the target detector. Noise was then added to the blurred image to correct for differences between the detectors and any required change in dose. The electronic, quantum, and structure noise were added appropriate to the air kerma selected for the simulated image and thus ensuring that the noise in the simulated image had the same magnitude and correlation as the target image. A correction was also made for differences in primary grid transmission, scatter, and veiling glare. The method was validated by acquiring images of a CDMAM contrast detail test object (Artinis, The Netherlands) at five different doses for the three systems. The ASE CDMAM images were then converted to appear with the imaging characteristics of target CR and CSI detectors. RESULTS: The measured threshold gold thicknesses of the simulated and target CDMAM images were closely matched at normal dose level and the average differences across the range of detail diameters were -4% and 0% for the CR and CSI systems, respectively. The conversion was successful for images acquired over a wide dose range. The average difference between simulated and target images for a given dose was a maximum of 11%. CONCLUSIONS: The validation shows that the image quality of a digital mammography image obtained with a particular system can be degraded, in terms of noise magnitude and color, sharpness, and contrast to account for differences in the detector and antiscatter grid. Potentially, this is a powerful tool for observer studies, as a range of image qualities can be examined by modifying an image set obtained at a single (better) image quality thus removing the patient variability when comparing systems.


Subject(s)
Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/methods , Mammography/methods , Radiation Dosage , Reproducibility of Results , Scattering, Radiation
11.
Med Phys ; 39(6): 3202-13, 2012 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22755704

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate if microcalcification detection varies significantly when mammographic images are acquired using different image qualities, including: different detectors, dose levels, and different image processing algorithms. An additional aim was to determine how the standard European method of measuring image quality using threshold gold thickness measured with a CDMAM phantom and the associated limits in current EU guidelines relate to calcification detection. METHODS: One hundred and sixty two normal breast images were acquired on an amorphous selenium direct digital (DR) system. Microcalcification clusters extracted from magnified images of slices of mastectomies were electronically inserted into half of the images. The calcification clusters had a subtle appearance. All images were adjusted using a validated mathematical method to simulate the appearance of images from a computed radiography (CR) imaging system at the same dose, from both systems at half this dose, and from the DR system at quarter this dose. The original 162 images were processed with both Hologic and Agfa (Musica-2) image processing. All other image qualities were processed with Agfa (Musica-2) image processing only. Seven experienced observers marked and rated any identified suspicious regions. Free response operating characteristic (FROC) and ROC analyses were performed on the data. The lesion sensitivity at a nonlesion localization fraction (NLF) of 0.1 was also calculated. Images of the CDMAM mammographic test phantom were acquired using the automatic setting on the DR system. These images were modified to the additional image qualities used in the observer study. The images were analyzed using automated software. In order to assess the relationship between threshold gold thickness and calcification detection a power law was fitted to the data. RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in calcification detection using CR compared with DR: the alternative FROC (AFROC) area decreased from 0.84 to 0.63 and the ROC area decreased from 0.91 to 0.79 (p < 0.0001). This corresponded to a 30% drop in lesion sensitivity at a NLF equal to 0.1. Detection was also sensitive to the dose used. There was no significant difference in detection between the two image processing algorithms used (p > 0.05). It was additionally found that lower threshold gold thickness from CDMAM analysis implied better cluster detection. The measured threshold gold thickness passed the acceptable limit set in the EU standards for all image qualities except half dose CR. However, calcification detection varied significantly between image qualities. This suggests that the current EU guidelines may need revising. CONCLUSIONS: Microcalcification detection was found to be sensitive to detector and dose used. Standard measurements of image quality were a good predictor of microcalcification cluster detection.


Subject(s)
Calcinosis/diagnostic imaging , Mammography/methods , Radiographic Image Enhancement/methods , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Calcinosis/complications , Humans , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted , Phantoms, Imaging , Quality Control , ROC Curve , Radiation Dosage
12.
Br J Radiol ; 95(1135): 20211400, 2022 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35604717

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: To record the radiation doses involved in UK breast screening and to identify any changes since previous publications related to technical factors and the population screened. METHODS: Mammographic exposure factors for 68,998 women imaged using 411 X-ray sets spread across the UK were compiled. Local output and half value layer measurements for each X-ray set were used to estimate mean glandular dose (MGD) using the standard UK method. RESULTS: Mean MGDs in digital mammography have increased by 11% since 2010-12 for both medio-lateral oblique (MLO) and cranio-caudal (CC) views. The mean compressed breast thickness (CBT) has increased (4.8% CC, 5.2% MLO) over the same period. The mean MLO CBT value of 62.4 ± 0.1 mm is outside the 50 to 60 mm range used for diagnostic reference levels. The increase in MGD is consistent with the CBT changes. The mean MGD in the 50 to 60 mm CBT range is 1.44 ± 0.03 mGy for MLO views. CBT varies with age and peaks at 51. CONCLUSIONS: Mean CBT has increased with time, and this has increased mean MGDs for digital mammography. CBT also varies with age. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE: Updated average MGDs in the UK are provided. There is evidence that breast size is increasing in the UK and that mean CBT is affected by age-related changes in the breast.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Breast , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Mammography/methods , Mass Screening , Radiation Dosage , United Kingdom
13.
J Med Imaging (Bellingham) ; 9(3): 033504, 2022 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35692280

ABSTRACT

Purpose: We set out a fully developed algorithm for adapting mammography images to appear as if acquired using different technique factors by changing the signal and noise within the images. The algorithm accounts for difference between the absorption by the object being imaged and the imaging system. Approach: Images were acquired using a Hologic Selenia Dimensions x-ray unit for the validation, of three thicknesses of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) blocks with or without different thicknesses of PMMA contrast objects acquired for a range of technique factors. One set of images was then adapted to appear the same as a target image acquired with a higher or lower tube voltage and/or a different anode/filter combination. The average linearized pixel value, normalized noise power spectra (NNPS), and standard deviation of the flat field images and the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) of the contrast object images were calculated for the simulated and target images. A simulation study tested the algorithm on images created using a voxel breast phantom at different technique factors and the images compared using local signal level, variance, and power spectra. Results: The average pixel value, NNPS, and standard deviation for the simulated and target images were found to be within 9%. The CNRs of the simulated and target images were found to be within 5% of each other. The differences between the target and simulated images of the voxel phantom were similar to those of the natural variability. Conclusions: We demonstrated that images can be successfully adapted to appear as if acquired using different technique factors. Using this conversion algorithm, it may be possible to examine the effect of tube voltage and anode/filter combination on cancer detection using clinical images.

14.
Med Phys ; 38(12): 6659-71, 2011 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22149848

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This work proposes a new method of building 3D models of microcalcification clusters and describes the validation of their realistic appearance when simulated into 2D digital mammograms and into breast tomosynthesis images. METHODS: A micro-CT unit was used to scan 23 breast biopsy specimens of microcalcification clusters with malignant and benign characteristics and their 3D reconstructed datasets were segmented to obtain 3D models of microcalcification clusters. These models were then adjusted for the x-ray spectrum used and for the system resolution and simulated into 2D projection images to obtain mammograms after image processing and into tomographic sequences of projection images, which were then reconstructed to form 3D tomosynthesis datasets. Six radiologists were asked to distinguish between 40 real and 40 simulated clusters of microcalcifications in two separate studies on 2D mammography and tomosynthesis datasets. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used to test the ability of each observer to distinguish between simulated and real microcalcification clusters. The kappa statistic was applied to assess how often the individual simulated and real microcalcification clusters had received similar scores ("agreement") on their realistic appearance in both modalities. This analysis was performed for all readers and for the real and the simulated group of microcalcification clusters separately. "Poor" agreement would reflect radiologists' confusion between simulated and real clusters, i.e., lesions not systematically evaluated in both modalities as either simulated or real, and would therefore be interpreted as a success of the present models. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve, averaged over the observers, was 0.55 (95% confidence interval [0.44, 0.66]) for the 2D study, and 0.46 (95% confidence interval [0.29, 0.64]) for the tomosynthesis study, indicating no statistically significant difference between real and simulated lesions (p > 0.05). Agreement between allocated lesion scores for 2D mammography and those for the tomosynthesis series was poor. CONCLUSIONS: The realistic appearance of the 3D models of microcalcification clusters, whether malignant or benign clusters, was confirmed for 2D digital mammography images and the breast tomosynthesis datasets; this database of clusters is suitable for use in future observer performance studies related to the detectability of microcalcification clusters. Such studies include comparing 2D digital mammography to breast tomosynthesis and comparing different reconstruction algorithms.


Subject(s)
Breast Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Calcinosis/diagnostic imaging , Imaging, Three-Dimensional/methods , Mammography/methods , Models, Biological , Radiographic Image Enhancement/methods , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methods , Computer Simulation , Female , Humans , Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted/methods , Reproducibility of Results , Sensitivity and Specificity
15.
Med Phys ; 48(11): 6859-6868, 2021 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34496038

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to measure the threshold diameter of calcifications and masses for 2D imaging, digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT), and synthetic 2D images, for a range of breast glandularities. This study shows the limits of detection for each of the technologies and the strengths and weaknesses of each in terms of visualizing the radiological features of small cancers. METHODS: Mathematical voxel breast phantoms with glandularities by volume of 9%, 18%, and 30% with a thickness of 53 mm were created. Simulated ill-defined masses and calcification clusters with a range of diameters were inserted into some of these breast models. The imaging characteristics of a Siemens Inspiration X-ray system were measured for a 29 kV, tungsten/rhodium anode/filter combination. Ray tracing through the breast models was undertaken to create simulated 2D and DBT projection images. These were then modified to adjust the image sharpness, and to add scatter and noise. The mean glandular doses for the images were 1.43, 1.47, and 1.47 mGy for 2D and 1.92, 1.97, and 1.98 mGy for DBT for the three glandularities. The resultant images were processed to create 2D, DBT planes and synthetic 2D images. Patches of the images with or without a simulated lesion were extracted, and used in a four-alternative forced choice study to measure the threshold diameters for each imaging mode, lesion type, and glandularity. The study was undertaken by six physicists. RESULTS: The threshold diameters of the lesions were 6.2, 4.9, and 6.7 mm (masses) and 225, 370, and 399 µm, (calcifications) for 2D, DBT, and synthetic 2D, respectively, for a breast glandularity of 18%. The threshold diameter of ill-defined masses is significantly smaller for DBT than for both 2D (p≤0.006) and synthetic 2D (p≤0.012) for all glandularities. Glandularity has a significant effect on the threshold diameter of masses, even for DBT where there is reduced background structure in the images. The calcification threshold diameters for 2D images were significantly smaller than for DBT and synthetic 2D for all glandularities. There were few significant differences for the threshold diameter of calcifications between glandularities, indicating that the background structure has little effect on the detection of calcifications. We measured larger but nonsignificant differences in the threshold diameters for synthetic 2D imaging than for 2D imaging for masses in the 9% (p = 0.059) and 18% (p = 0.19) glandularities. The threshold diameters for synthetic 2D imaging were larger than for 2D imaging for calcifications (p < 0.001) for all glandularities. CONCLUSIONS: We have shown that glandularity has only a small effect on the detection of calcifications, but the threshold diameter of masses was significantly larger for higher glandularity for all of the modalities tested. We measured nonsignificantly larger threshold diameters for synthetic 2D imaging than for 2D imaging for masses at the 9% (p = 0.059) and 18% (p = 0.19) glandularities and significantly larger diameters for calcifications (p < 0.001) for all glandularities. The lesions simulated were very subtle and further work is required to examine the clinical effect of not seeing the smallest calcifications in clusters.


Subject(s)
Breast Diseases , Breast Neoplasms , Neoplasms , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Mammography , Phantoms, Imaging , Radiographic Image Enhancement
17.
Phys Med ; 58: 8-20, 2019 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30824154

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: to develop a channelized model observer (CHO) that matches human reader (HR) scoring of a physical phantom containing breast simulating structure and mass lesion-like targets for use in quality control of digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) imaging systems. METHODS: A total of 108 DBT scans of the phantom was acquired using a Siemens Inspiration DBT system. The detectability of mass-like targets was evaluated by human readers using a 4-alternative forced choice (4-AFC) method. The percentage correct (PC) values were then used as the benchmark for CHO tuning, again using a 4-AFC method. Three different channel functions were considered: Gabor, Laguerre-Gauss and Difference of Gaussian. With regard to the observer template, various methods for generating the expected signal were studied along with the influence of the number of training images used to form the covariance matrix for the observer template. Impact of bias in the training process on the observer template was evaluated next, as well as HR and CHO reproducibility. RESULTS: HR performance was most closely matched by 8 Gabor channels with tuned phase, orientation and frequency, using an observer template generated from training image data. Just 24 DBT image stacks were required to give robust CHO performance with 0% bias, although a bias of up to 33% in the training images also gave acceptable performance. CHO and HR reproducibility were similar (on average 3.2 PC versus 3.4 PC). CONCLUSIONS: The CHO algorithm developed matches human reader performance and is therefore a promising candidate for automated readout of phantom studies.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Mammography/instrumentation , Phantoms, Imaging , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted , Observer Variation , Radiation Dosage
18.
Med Phys ; 46(11): 4826-4836, 2019 Nov.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31410861

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Virtual clinical trials (VCT) are a powerful imaging tool that can be used to investigate digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) technology. In this work, a fast and simple method is proposed to estimate the two-dimensional distribution of scattered radiation which is needed when simulating DBT geometries in VCTs. METHODS: Monte Carlo simulations are used to precalculate scatter-to-primary ratio (SPR) for a range of low-resolution homogeneous phantoms. The resulting values can be used to estimate the two-dimensional (2D) distribution of scattered radiation arising from inhomogeneous anthropomorphic phantoms used in VCTs. The method has been validated by comparing the values of the scatter thus obtained against the results of direct Monte Carlo simulation for three different types of inhomogeneous anthropomorphic phantoms. RESULTS: Differences between the proposed scatter field estimation method and the ground truth data for the OPTIMAM phantom had an average modulus and standard deviation of over the projected breast area of 2.4 ± 0.9% (minimum -17.0%, maximum 27.7%). The corresponding values for the University of Pennsylvania and Duke University breast phantoms were 1.8 ± 0.1% (minimum -8.7%, maximum 8.0%) and 5.1 ± 0.1% (minimum -16.2%, maximum 7.4%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed method, which has been validated using three of the most common breast models, is a useful tool for accurately estimating scattered radiation in VCT schemes used to study current designs of DBT system.


Subject(s)
Mammography , Monte Carlo Method , Scattering, Radiation , Computer Simulation , Phantoms, Imaging , Time Factors
19.
Phys Med ; 57: 25-32, 2019 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30738528

ABSTRACT

Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is currently under consideration for replacement of, or combined use with 2D-mammography in national breast screening programmes. To investigate the potential benefits that DBT can bring to screening, the threshold detectable lesion diameters were measured for different forms of DBT in comparison to 2D-mammography. The aim of this study was to compare the threshold detectable mass diameters obtained with narrow angle (15°/15 projections) and wide angle (50°/25 projections) DBT in comparison to 2D-mammography. Simulated images of 60 mm thick compressed breasts were produced with and without masses using a set of validated image modelling tools for 2D-mammography and DBT. Image processing and reconstruction were performed using commercial software. A series of 4-alternative forced choice (4AFC) experiments was conducted for signal detection with the masses as targets. The threshold detectable mass diameter was found for each imaging modality with a mean glandular dose of 2.5 mGy. The resulting values of the threshold diameter for 2D-mammography (10.2 ±â€¯1.4 mm) were found to be larger (p < 0.001) than those for narrow angle DBT (6.0 ±â€¯1.1 mm) and wide angle DBT (5.6 ±â€¯1.2 mm). There was no significant difference between the threshold diameters for wide and narrow angle DBT. Implications for the introduction of DBT alone or in combination with 2D-mammography in breast cancer screening are discussed.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Mammography/methods , Tumor Burden , Humans
20.
Br J Radiol ; 91(1090): 20170246, 2018 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29436850

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:: To compare breast cancer detection using a single 8MP display with using a standard pair of 5MP monitors. METHODS:: An observer study was carried out in which mammograms were read using full field views only, and again with the additional use of magnified quadrant views. Seven observers read 300 cases, one view per breast, using each display type. Cases comprised 100 normal cases and 200 cases with cancers of subtle or very subtle appearance: 100 with malignant calcification clusters and 100 with non-calcified lesions. JAFROC software was used to analyse the results. RESULTS:: When mammograms were viewed full field only, observers performed better (p = 0.050) in detecting malignant calcification clusters when using the pair of 5MP monitors compared with a single 8MP monitor. This result became non-significant when results were generalised to a population of readers. Performance in detecting calcification clusters was improved by using quadrant view in addition to full field view when using either the pair of 5MP monitors or the 8MP monitor. There was no significant difference in detection of all types of cancer between the pair of 5MP monitors and the 8MP monitor when quadrant zoom was used. CONCLUSION:: Providing quadrant view is used in addition to full field view, there is no significant difference in cancer detection between the 8MP monitor and the pair of 5MP monitors. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE:: Effect of magnification on the detectability of subtle malignant calcification clusters in breast screening.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Data Display , Mammography/instrumentation , Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted/instrumentation , Calcinosis/diagnostic imaging , Computer Terminals , Female , Humans
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL