Estimating Screening-Mammography Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) Curves from Stratified Random Samples of Screening Mammograms: A Simulation Study

被引:1
作者
Zur, Richard M. [1 ]
Pesce, Lorenzo L. [1 ]
Jiang, Yulei [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Chicago, Dept Radiol, Chicago, IL 60637 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Screening mammography; simulation study; stratified random sampling; observer studies; ROC analysis; MAXIMUM-LIKELIHOOD-ESTIMATION; LABORATORY ENVIRONMENT; BREAST-CANCER; PREVALENCE; PERFORMANCE;
D O I
10.1016/j.acra.2014.12.011
中图分类号
R8 [特种医学]; R445 [影像诊断学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100207 ; 1009 ;
摘要
Rationale and Objectives: To evaluate stratified random sampling (SRS) of screening mammograms by (1) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment categories, and (2) the presence of breast cancer in mammograms, for estimation of screening-mammography receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves in retrospective observer studies. Materials and Methods: We compared observer study case sets constructed by (1) random sampling (RS); (2) SRS with proportional allocation (SRS-P) with BI-RADS 1 and 2 noncancer cases accounting for 90.6% of all noncancer cases; (3) SRS with disproportional allocation (SRS-D) with BI-RADS 1 and 2 noncancer cases accounting for 10%-80%; and (4) SRS-D and multiple imputation (SRS-D + MI) with missing BI-RADS 1 and 2 noncancer cases imputed to recover the 90.6% proportion. Monte Carlo simulated case sets were drawn from a large case population modeled after published Digital-Mammography Imaging Screening Trial data. We compared the bias, root-mean-square error, and coverage of 95% confidence intervals of area under the ROC curve (AUC) estimates from the sampling methods (200-2000 cases, of which 25% were cancer cases) versus from the large case population. Results: AUC estimates were unbiased from RS, SRS-P, and SRS-D + MI, but biased from SRS-D. AUC estimates from SRS-P and SRS-D + MI had 10% smaller root-mean-square error than RS. Conclusions: Both SRS-P and SRS-D + MI can be used-to obtain unbiased and 10% more efficient estimate of screening-mammography ROC curves.
引用
收藏
页码:580 / 590
页数:11
相关论文
共 22 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], P SPIE
[2]   The Gothenburg Breast Screening Trial [J].
Bjurstam, N ;
Björneld, L ;
Warwick, J ;
Sala, E ;
Duffy, SW ;
Nyström, L ;
Walker, N ;
Cahlin, E ;
Eriksson, O ;
Hafström, LO ;
Lingaas, H ;
Mattsson, J ;
Persson, S ;
Rudenstam, CM ;
Salander, H ;
Säve-Söderbergh, J ;
Wahlin, T .
CANCER, 2003, 97 (10) :2387-2396
[3]  
D'Orsi C.J., 2003, Breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) breast imaging atlas
[4]   RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC RATING ANALYSIS - GENERALIZATION TO THE POPULATION OF READERS AND PATIENTS WITH THE JACKKNIFE METHOD [J].
DORFMAN, DD ;
BERBAUM, KS ;
METZ, CE .
INVESTIGATIVE RADIOLOGY, 1992, 27 (09) :723-731
[5]   From the laboratory to the clinic: The "prevalence effect"' [J].
Gur, D ;
Rockette, HE ;
Warfel, T ;
Lacomis, JM ;
Fuhrman, CR .
ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2003, 10 (11) :1324-1326
[6]   Prevalence effect in a laboratory environment [J].
Gur, D ;
Rockette, HE ;
Armfield, DR ;
Blachar, A ;
Bogan, JK ;
Brancatelli, G ;
Britton, CA ;
Brown, ML ;
Davis, PL ;
Ferris, JV ;
Fuhrman, CR ;
Golla, SK ;
Katyal, S ;
Lacomis, JM ;
McCook, BM ;
Thaete, FL ;
Warfel, TE .
RADIOLOGY, 2003, 228 (01) :10-14
[7]   The "Laboratory" effect: Comparing radiologists' performance and variability during prospective clinical and laboratory mammography interpretations [J].
Gur, David ;
Bandos, Andriy I. ;
Cohen, Cathy S. ;
Hakim, Christiane M. ;
Hardesty, Lara A. ;
Ganott, Marie A. ;
Perrin, Ronald L. ;
Poller, William R. ;
Shah, Ratan ;
Sumkin, Jules H. ;
Wallace, Luisa P. ;
Rockette, Howard E. .
RADIOLOGY, 2008, 249 (01) :47-53
[8]   The prevalence effect in a laboratory environment: Changing the confidence ratings [J].
Gur, David ;
Bandos, Andriy I. ;
Fuhrman, Carl R. ;
Klym, Amy H. ;
King, Jill L. ;
Rockette, Howard E. .
ACADEMIC RADIOLOGY, 2007, 14 (01) :49-53
[9]   BI-RADS Data Should Not Be Used to Estimate ROC Curves [J].
Jiang, Yulei ;
Metz, Charles E. .
RADIOLOGY, 2010, 256 (01) :29-31
[10]  
Little RJA, 2002, STAT ANAL MISSING DA