AJR Get Involved! Join ARRS Today
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cupples, T. E.
Right arrow Articles by Reynolds, J. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cupples, T. E.
Right arrow Articles by Reynolds, J. C.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
DOI:10.2214/AJR.04.1300
AJR 2005; 185:944-950
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Original Research

Impact of Computer-Aided Detection in a Regional Screening Mammography Program

Tommy E. Cupples1, Joan E. Cunningham2,3 and James C. Reynolds4

1 South Carolina Comprehensive Breast Center, Palmetto Richland Memorial Hospital, One Richland Medical Park Dr., Suite 120, Columbia, SC 29203.
2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29203.
3 South Carolina Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbia, SC.
4 Department of Pathology, Palmetto Richland Memorial Hospital, Columbia, SC 29203.

OBJECTIVE. This study was conducted to prospectively assess the effect of computer-aided detection (CAD) on screening outcomes in a regional mammography program.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. Between January 1, 1998, and December 31, 2000, 27,274 consecutive screenings were performed. Radiologists' performance before CAD (n = 7,872) and with CAD (n = 19,402) was determined by annual audits. All positive biopsy results were reviewed; histopathology was reviewed and confirmed. Outcomes (recall, biopsy, and cancer detection rates) with CAD (1999, 2000) were compared with historical control data (1998).

RESULTS. With CAD, increases were seen in recall rate (8.1%, from 7.7% to 8.3%), biopsy rate (6.7%, from 1.4% to 1.5%), and cancer detection rate (16.1%, from 3.7 per 1,000 to 4.3 per 1,000). Detection rate of invasive cancers of 1.0 cm or less increased 164% (from 0.508 to 1.34 per 1,000 screens; p = 0.069). Detection rate of in situ cancers declined 6.7% (from 1.27 to 1.19 per 1,000; p = 0.849). In multivariable analysis of invasive cancers, early stage (stage I) was strongly associated with detection by CAD (odds ratio = 4.13, p = 0.025). Mean age at screening detection of cancer was 5.3 years younger in the CAD group than in the pre-CAD group (p = 0.060).

CONCLUSION. Increased detection rate, younger age at diagnosis, and significantly earlier stage of invasive cancer detection are consistent with a positive screening impact of CAD. Audit results were positive but generally not statistically significant due to sample size limitations. Our findings support the hypothesis that screening with CAD significantly improves detection of the specific cancer morphologies that CAD algorithms were designed to detect.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
JNMHome page
M. Sadik, I. Hamadeh, P. Nordblom, M. Suurkula, P. Hoglund, M. Ohlsson, and L. Edenbrandt
Computer-Assisted Interpretation of Planar Whole-Body Bone Scans
J. Nucl. Med., December 1, 2008; 49(12): 1958 - 1965.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
F. J. Gilbert, S. M. Astley, M. G.C. Gillan, O. F. Agbaje, M. G. Wallis, J. James, C. R.M. Boggis, S. W. Duffy, and the CADET II Group
Single Reading with Computer-Aided Detection for Screening Mammography
N. Engl. J. Med., October 16, 2008; 359(16): 1675 - 1684.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. Gromet
Comparison of Computer-Aided Detection to Double Reading of Screening Mammograms: Review of 231,221 Mammograms
Am. J. Roentgenol., April 1, 2008; 190(4): 854 - 859.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
R. F. Brem
Blinded Comparison of Computer-Aided Detection with Human Second Reading in Screening Mammography: The Importance of the Question and the Critical Numbers Game
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2007; 189(5): 1142 - 1144.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
R. L. Ellis, A. A. Meade, M. A. Mathiason, K. M. Willison, and W. Logan-Young
Evaluation of Computer-aided Detection Systems in the Detection of Small Invasive Breast Carcinoma
Radiology, October 1, 2007; 245(1): 88 - 94.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
M. E. Baker, L. Bogoni, N. A. Obuchowski, C. Dass, R. M. Kendzierski, E. M. Remer, D. M. Einstein, P. Cathier, A. Jerebko, S. Lakare, et al.
Computer-aided Detection of Colorectal Polyps: Can It Improve Sensitivity of Less-Experienced Readers? Preliminary Findings
Radiology, October 1, 2007; 245(1): 140 - 149.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
G. P. Krestin, J. C. Miller, S. J. Golding, G. G. Frija, G. M. Glazer, H. G. Ringertz, and J. H. Thrall
Reinventing Radiology in a Digital and Molecular Age: Summary of Proceedings of the Sixth Biannual Symposium of the International Society for Strategic Studies in Radiology (IS3R), August 25 27, 2005
Radiology, September 1, 2007; 244(3): 633 - 638.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
NEJMHome page
J. J. Fenton, S. H. Taplin, P. A. Carney, L. Abraham, E. A. Sickles, C. D'Orsi, E. A. Berns, G. Cutter, R. E. Hendrick, W. E. Barlow, et al.
Influence of Computer-Aided Detection on Performance of Screening Mammography
N. Engl. J. Med., April 5, 2007; 356(14): 1399 - 1409.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
P. Skaane, A. Kshirsagar, S. Stapleton, K. Young, and R. A. Castellino
Effect of Computer-Aided Detection on Independent Double Reading of Paired Screen-Film and Full-Field Digital Screening Mammograms
Am. J. Roentgenol., February 1, 2007; 188(2): 377 - 384.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Br. J. Radiol.Home page
N Karssemeijer, J D M Otten, H Rijken, and R Holland
Computer aided detection of masses in mammograms as decision support
Br. J. Radiol., December 1, 2006; 79(Special_Issue_2): S123 - S126.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. C. Dean and C. C. Ilvento
Improved cancer detection using computer-aided detection with diagnostic and screening mammography: prospective study of 104 cancers.
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2006; 187(1): 20 - 28.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
J. H. Sumkin, D. Gur, R. L. Birdwell, and D. M. Ikeda
Computer-aided Detection with Screening Mammography: Improving Performance or Simply Shifting the Operating Point?
Radiology, June 1, 2006; 239(3): 916 - 918.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. S. Greenberg
An Appellate Court Ruling and Potential Implications for CAD Technology in the Courtroom
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2006; 186(1): 52 - 53.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2005 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.