Evaluation of Automated Mammographic Density Classification in Tomosynthesis: Comparison with Radiologists

被引:0
|
作者
Kiziloglu, Hueseyin Alper [1 ]
Beyhan, Murat [1 ]
Gokce, Erkan [1 ]
Birisik, Yasar [1 ]
Battal, Muhammet Furkan [1 ]
Ceker, Muhammed Erkam [1 ]
Demir, Osman [2 ]
机构
[1] Tokat Gaziosmanpasa Univ, Fac Med, Dept Radiol, Kaleardi Neighborhood Muhittin Fisunoglu St, TR-60250 Tokat, Turkiye
[2] Tokat Gaziosmanpasa Univ, Fac Med, Dept Biostat, Tokat, Turkiye
来源
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF THERAPEUTICS | 2024年 / 30卷 / 03期
关键词
Bellus software; mammographic density; automatic; BREAST DENSITY; 5TH EDITION; VARIABILITY; WOMEN;
D O I
10.58600/eurjther2002
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Objective: Breast cancer screening is a valuable field of health research conducted through mammography. However, mammography evaluation is the examination with the most frequent lack of to agrement among radiologists. In this study we aimed to show the compatibility of mammographic density classification with a new software, Bellus Breast Density Measurement Software (Option), with visual examination. Methods: The mammographic density classification of 500 patients was retrospectively determined by five radiologists with varying levels of experience, according to the 5th version of the breast imaging reporting and data system (BIRADS). The mean age of 500 women included in the study was calculated as 53.8 +/- 10.08. The obtained data were compared with the Bellus software mammographic density classification of the same patients. Then, the visual evaluation and the compatibility of the Bellus software and the readers were compared. Results: The agreement between the Bellus software and all five readers was poor (kappa value 0.07-0.12). The agreement of the readers with each other is moderate-good (kappa value 0.0540.64). The Intraclass Correlation Coeffi cient (ICC) value for the five separate readers was calculated to be 0.80, indicating good compatibility, while the ICC value for the Bellus software with the five separate readers was calculated to be 0.74, indicating moderate compatibility. The Friedman test revealed that while the mammographic density classification of each reader remained consistent, the classification provided by the Bellus software differed. Conclusion: Bellus Breast Density Measurement Software (Option) diagnostic accuracy is lower than visual examination. We recommend that the manufacturer develop the software.
引用
收藏
页码:258 / 266
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Introduction of an Automated User-Independent Quantitative Volumetric Magnetic Resonance Imaging Breast Density Measurement System Using the Dixon Sequence Comparison With Mammographic Breast Density Assessment
    Wengert, Georg Johannes
    Helbich, Thomas H.
    Vogl, Wolf-Dieter
    Baltzer, Pascal
    Langs, Georg
    Weber, Michael
    Bogner, Wolfgang
    Gruber, Stephan
    Trattnig, Siegfried
    Pinker, Katja
    INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 2015, 50 (02) : 73 - 80
  • [32] Variations of image interpretations of radiologists from different populations in mammography and tomosynthesis with different levels of breast density
    Trieu, Phuong Dung
    Xiao, Qin
    Gu, Yajia
    Lewis, Sarah J.
    Barron, Melissa L.
    Tapia, Kriscia
    Brennan, Patrick C.
    Li, Tong
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL IMAGING, 2023, 10 (02)
  • [33] A comparison of five methods of measuring mammographic density: a case-control study
    Astley, Susan M.
    Harkness, Elaine F.
    Sergeant, Jamie C.
    Warwick, Jane
    Stavrinos, Paula
    Warren, Ruth
    Wilson, Mary
    Beetles, Ursula
    Gadde, Soujanya
    Lim, Yit
    Jain, Anil
    Bundred, Sara
    Barr, Nicola
    Reece, Valerie
    Brentnall, Adam R.
    Cuzick, Jack
    Howell, Tony
    Evans, D. Gareth
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH, 2018, 20
  • [34] Mammographic density: Comparison of visual assessment with fully automatic calculation on a multivendor dataset
    Sacchetto, Daniela
    Morra, Lia
    Agliozzo, Silvano
    Bernardi, Daniela
    Bjorklund, Tomas
    Brancato, Beniamino
    Bravetti, Patrizia
    Carbonaro, Luca A.
    Correale, Loredana
    Fanto, Carmen
    Favettini, Elisabetta
    Martincich, Laura
    Milanesio, Luisella
    Mombelloni, Sara
    Monetti, Francesco
    Morrone, Doralba
    Pellegrini, Marco
    Pesce, Barbara
    Petrillo, Antonella
    Saguatti, Gianni
    Stevanin, Carmen
    Trimboli, Rubina M.
    Tuttobene, Paola
    Valentini, Marvi
    Marra, Vincenzo
    Frigerio, Alfonso
    Bert, Alberto
    Sardanelli, Francesco
    EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2016, 26 (01) : 175 - 183
  • [35] Automated Breast Density Computation in Digital Mammography and Digital Breast Tomosynthesis: Influence on Mean Glandular Dose and BIRADS Density Categorization
    Castillo-Garcia, Maria
    Chevalier, Margarita
    Garayoa, Julia
    Rodriguez-Ruiz, Alejandro
    Garcia-Pinto, Diego
    Valverde, Julio
    ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2017, 24 (07) : 802 - 810
  • [36] Effect of Mammographic Screening Modality on Breast Density Assessment: Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis
    Gastounioti, Aimilia
    McCarthy, Anne Marie
    Pantalone, Lauren
    Synnestvedt, Marie
    Kontos, Despina
    Conant, Emily F.
    RADIOLOGY, 2019, 291 (02) : 319 - 326
  • [37] Comparing Mammographic Density Assessed by Digital Breast Tomosynthesis or Digital Mammography: The Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium
    Tice, Jeffrey A.
    Gard, Charlotte C.
    Miglioretti, Diana L.
    Sprague, Brian L.
    Tosteson, Anna N. A.
    Joe, Bonnie N.
    Ho, Thao-Quyen H.
    Kerlikowske, Karla
    RADIOLOGY, 2022, 302 (02) : 286 - 292
  • [38] Automated mammographic breast density estimation using a fully convolutional network
    Lee, Juhun
    Nishikawa, Robert M.
    MEDICAL PHYSICS, 2018, 45 (03) : 1178 - 1190
  • [39] Evaluation of the association of endometriosis and mammographic breast density, a cross-sectional study
    Ashraf Moini
    Elnaz Salari
    Hadi Rashidi
    Khadije Maajani
    Mahboubeh Abedi
    Leila Bayani
    Sadaf Alipour
    BMC Women's Health, 22
  • [40] Mammographic Density Assessment by Artificial Intelligence-Based Computer-Assisted Diagnosis: A Comparison with Automated Volumetric Assessment
    Lee, Si Eun
    Son, Nak-Hoon
    Kim, Myung Hyun
    Kim, Eun-Kyung
    JOURNAL OF DIGITAL IMAGING, 2022, 35 (02) : 173 - 179