| Title: |
Mammographic density: Comparison of visual assessment with fully automatic calculation on a multivendor dataset. |
| Authors: |
Sacchetto, Daniela, Morra, Lia, Agliozzo, Silvano, Bernardi, Daniela, Björklund, Tomas, Brancato, Beniamino, Bravetti, Patrizia, Carbonaro, Luca, Correale, Loredana, Fantò, Carmen, Favettini, Elisabetta, Martincich, Laura, Milanesio, Luisella, Mombelloni, Sara, Monetti, Francesco, Morrone, Doralba, Pellegrini, Marco, Pesce, Barbara, Petrillo, Antonella, Saguatti, Gianni |
| Source: |
European Radiology; Jan2016, Vol. 26 Issue 1, p175-183, 9p |
| Subject Terms: |
MAMMOGRAMS, BREAST imaging, RADIOLOGISTS, STANDARD deviations, STATISTICAL correlation, COHEN'S kappa coefficient (Statistics), INTER-observer reliability, BREAST abnormalities, BAR codes, BREAST tumors, COMPARATIVE studies, RESEARCH methodology, MEDICAL cooperation, RESEARCH, RESEARCH evaluation, TUMOR classification, EVALUATION research, RECEIVER operating characteristic curves, BARTHEL Index |
| Abstract: |
Objectives: To compare breast density (BD) assessment provided by an automated BD evaluator (ABDE) with that provided by a panel of experienced breast radiologists, on a multivendor dataset.Methods: Twenty-one radiologists assessed 613 screening/diagnostic digital mammograms from nine centers and six different vendors, using the BI-RADS a, b, c, and d density classification. The same mammograms were also evaluated by an ABDE providing the ratio between fibroglandular and total breast area on a continuous scale and, automatically, the BI-RADS score. A panel majority report (PMR) was used as reference standard. Agreement (κ) and accuracy (proportion of cases correctly classified) were calculated for binary (BI-RADS a-b versus c-d) and 4-class classification.Results: While the agreement of individual radiologists with the PMR ranged from κ = 0.483 to κ = 0.885, the ABDE correctly classified 563/613 mammograms (92 %). A substantial agreement for binary classification was found for individual reader pairs (κ = 0.620, standard deviation [SD] = 0.140), individual versus PMR (κ = 0.736, SD = 0.117), and individual versus ABDE (κ = 0.674, SD = 0.095). Agreement between ABDE and PMR was almost perfect (κ = 0.831).Conclusions: The ABDE showed an almost perfect agreement with a 21-radiologist panel in binary BD classification on a multivendor dataset, earning a chance as a reproducible alternative to visual evaluation.Key Points: Individual BD assessment differs from PMR with κ as low as 0.483. An ABDE correctly classified 92 % of mammograms with almost perfect agreement (κ = 0.831). An ABDE can be a valid alternative to subjective BD assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of European Radiology is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| Database: |
Complementary Index |
