Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Quantra reproduces BI-RADS assessment on a two-point scale
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00

Paper Abstract

PURPOSE: To assess the performance of QuantraTM in reproducing BI-RADS® mammographic breast density (MBD) assessment. METHODS: Two methods of MBD assessment were used (QuantraTM and BI-RADS®). Volumetric breast density measurement from 292 raw projection images was performed using QuantraTM. BI-RADS® assessment was performed by three radiologists and a majority report (consensus of at least two radiologists) was generated. Interreader agreement (κ), agreement, and the sensitivity and specificity of QuantraTM in reproducing BI-RADS® rating were calculated on a four-grade (1, 2, 3, and 4) and two-grade (1–2 vs. 3–4) scale. RESULTS: The majority BI-RADS® report in the dataset consisted of 9.6% (n = 28), 35.3% (n = 103), 27.1% (n = 79), and 28.1% (n = 82) for BI-RADS® 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. Intra-reader agreement (κ) was 0.86 (95%CI: 0.83 – 0.91) to 0.88 (95%CI: 0.85 – 0.93) on a four-grade and 0.88 (95%CI: 0.83 – 0.92) to 0.91 (95%CI: 0.88 – 0.95) on a two-grade scale. Inter-reader agreement (κ) was substantial [0.66 (95%CI: 0.62 – 0.71) to 0.75 (95%CI: 0.70 – 0.81)] on a four-grade scale and substantial to almost perfect [0.77 (95%CI: 0.73 – 0.82) to 0.89 (95%CI: 0.84 – 0.93)] on a two-grade scale. QuantraTM correctly classified 35.7%, 91.2%, 88.6%, and 50.3% of BI-RADS® 1, 2, 3, and 4 respectively. It also demonstrated 91.3% sensitivity and 83.6% specificity in reproducing BI-RADS® on a two-grade scale (1–2 vs. 3–4). CONCLUSION: QuantraTM has limited performance in reproducing BI-RADS® rating on a four-grade scale, however, highly reproduces BI-RADS® assessment on a two-grade scale.

Paper Details

Date Published: 24 March 2016
PDF: 9 pages
Proc. SPIE 9787, Medical Imaging 2016: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment, 978702 (24 March 2016); doi: 10.1117/12.2205391
Show Author Affiliations
Ernest U. Ekpo, The Univ. of Sydney (Australia)
Univ. of Calabar (Nigeria)
Claudia Mello-Thoms, The Univ. of Sydney (Australia)
Mary Rickard, The Univ. of Sydney (Australia)
Sydney Breast Clinic (Australia)
Patrick C. Brennan, The Univ. of Sydney (Australia)
Mark F. McEntee, The Univ. of Sydney (Australia)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 9787:
Medical Imaging 2016: Image Perception, Observer Performance, and Technology Assessment
Craig K. Abbey; Matthew A. Kupinski, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top