Share Email Print
cover

Proceedings Paper

Mammographic calcification cluster detection and threshold gold thickness measurements
Author(s): L. M. Warren; A. Mackenzie; J. Cooke; R. Given-Wilson; M. G. Wallis; D. P. Chakraborty; D. R. Dance; K. C. Young
Format Member Price Non-Member Price
PDF $14.40 $18.00
cover GOOD NEWS! Your organization subscribes to the SPIE Digital Library. You may be able to download this paper for free. Check Access

Paper Abstract

European Guidelines for quality control in digital mammography specify acceptable and achievable standards of image quality (IQ) in terms of threshold gold thickness using the CDMAM test object. However, there is little evidence relating such measurements to cancer detection. This work investigated the relationship between calcification detection and threshold gold thickness. An observer study was performed using a set of 162 amorphous selenium direct digital (DR) detector images (81 no cancer and 81 with 1-3 inserted calcification clusters). From these images four additional IQs were simulated: different digital detectors (computed radiography (CR) and DR) and dose levels. Seven observers marked and rated the locations of suspicious regions. DBM analysis of variances was performed on the JAFROC figure of merit (FoM) yielding 95% confidence intervals for IQ pairs. Automated threshold gold thickness (Tg) analysis was performed for the 0.25mm gold disc diameter on CDMAM images at the same IQs (16 images per IQ). Tg was plotted against FoM and a power law fitted to the data. There was a significant reduction in FoM for calcification detection for CR images compared with DR; FoM decreased from 0.83 to 0.63 (p≤0.0001). Detection was also sensitive to dose. There was a good correlation between FoM and Tg (R2=0.80, p<0.05), consequently threshold gold thickness was a good predictor of calcification detection at the same IQ. Since the majority of threshold gold thicknesses for the various IQs were above the acceptable standard despite large variations in calcification detection by radiologists, current EU guidelines may need revising.

Paper Details

Date Published: 3 March 2012
PDF: 10 pages
Proc. SPIE 8313, Medical Imaging 2012: Physics of Medical Imaging, 83130J (3 March 2012); doi: 10.1117/12.911434
Show Author Affiliations
L. M. Warren, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (United Kingdom)
A. Mackenzie, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (United Kingdom)
J. Cooke, Jarvis Breast Screening and Diagnostic Ctr. (United Kingdom)
R. Given-Wilson, St George's Healthcare NHS Trust (United Kingdom)
M. G. Wallis, Cambridge Breast Unit (United Kingdom)
NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Ctr. (United Kingdom)
D. P. Chakraborty, Univ. of Pittsburgh (United States)
D. R. Dance, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (United Kingdom)
Univ. of Surrey (United Kingdom)
K. C. Young, Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Foundation Trust (United Kingdom)
Univ. of Surrey (United Kingdom)


Published in SPIE Proceedings Vol. 8313:
Medical Imaging 2012: Physics of Medical Imaging
Norbert J. Pelc; Robert M. Nishikawa; Bruce R. Whiting, Editor(s)

© SPIE. Terms of Use
Back to Top