Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Nov;20(11):2557-64.
doi: 10.1007/s00330-010-1844-1. Epub 2010 Jul 15.

Breast cancer detection: radiologists' performance using mammography with and without automated whole-breast ultrasound

Kevin M Kelly  1 , Judy Dean, Sung-Jae Lee, W Scott Comulada
Affiliations

Breast cancer detection: radiologists' performance using mammography with and without automated whole-breast ultrasound

Kevin M Kelly et al. Eur Radiol. 2010 Nov.

Abstract

Objective: Radiologist reader performance for breast cancer detection using mammography plus automated whole-breast ultrasound (AWBU) was compared with mammography alone.

Methods: Screenings for non-palpable breast malignancies in women with radiographically dense breasts with contemporaneous mammograms and AWBU were reviewed by 12 radiologists blinded to the diagnoses; half the studies were abnormal. Readers first reviewed the 102 mammograms. The American College of Radiology (ACR) Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BIRADS) and Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial (DMIST) likelihood ratings were recorded with location information for identified abnormalities. Readers then reviewed the mammograms and AWBU with knowledge of previous mammogram-only evaluation. We compared reader performance across screening techniques using absolute callback, areas under the curve (AUC), and figure of merit (FOM).

Results: True positivity of cancer detection increased 63%, with only a 4% decrease in true negativity. Reader-averaged AUC was higher for mammography plus AWBU compared with mammography alone by BIRADS (0.808 versus 0.701) and likelihood scores (0.810 versus 0.703). Similarly, FOM was higher for mammography plus AWBU compared with mammography alone by BIRADS (0.786 versus 0.613) and likelihood scores (0.791 versus 0.614).

Conclusion: Adding AWBU to mammography improved callback rates, accuracy of breast cancer detection, and confidence in callbacks for dense-breasted women.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Receiver operating characteristic curves averaged across 12 readers for mammography alone (circles and dashed line) and mammography plus AWBU (triangles and solid line)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Changes in areas under the receiver operating characteristic curve(s) for each reader (hollow circles) and averaged across 12 readers (solid circles)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Tabár L, Fagerberg CJ, Gad A, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography. Randomised trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet. 1985;325:829–832. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(85)92204-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shapiro S, Venet W, Strax P, Venet L, Roeser R. Ten to fourteen-year effect of screening on breast cancer mortality. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1982;69:349–355. - PubMed
    1. Mendelson EB, Baum JK, Berg WA, Merritt CRB, Rubin E. Breast imaging reporting and data system, BI-RADS: ultrasound. 1. Reston, VA: American College of Radiology; 2003.
    1. Boyd NF, Guo H, Martin LJ, et al. Mammographic density and the risk and detection of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:227–236. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa062790. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, et al. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:427–500. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa031759. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types