Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28647388›Full record

ArticleAcademic radiology2017

Characterization of Breast Masses in Digital Breast Tomosynthesis and Digital Mammograms: An Observer Performance Study.

Heang-Ping Chan, Mark A Helvie, Lubomir Hadjiiski, Deborah O Jeffries, Katherine A Klein, Colleen H Neal, Mitra Noroozian, Chintana Paramagul, Marilyn A Roubidoux

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Academic radiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. [Assessment of imaging performance of digital breast tomosynthesis based on systematic simulation].Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Synthesizing mammogram from digital breast tomosynthesis.Physics in medicine and biology · 2019
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Heang-Ping ChanDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Med Inn Building C477, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5842. Electronic address: chanhp@umich.edu.
Mark A HelvieDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Med Inn Building C477, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5842.
Lubomir HadjiiskiDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Med Inn Building C477, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5842.
Deborah O JeffriesDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Med Inn Building C477, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5842.
Katherine A KleinDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Med Inn Building C477, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5842.
Colleen H NealDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Med Inn Building C477, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5842.
Mitra NoroozianDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Med Inn Building C477, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5842.
Chintana ParamagulDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Med Inn Building C477, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5842.
Marilyn A RoubidouxDepartment of Radiology, University of Michigan, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Med Inn Building C477, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-5842.

Funding

Improvement of microcalcification detection in digital breast tomosynthesisR01CA151443 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI CHAN, HEANG-PING · 2011 to 2015
$3.0M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA151443
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RATIONALE AND

objectivesThis study aimed to compare Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) assessment of lesions in two-view digital mammogram (DM) to two-view wide-angle digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) without DM. MATERIALS AND

methodsWith Institutional Review Board approval and written informed consent, two-view DBTs were acquired from 134 subjects and the corresponding DMs were collected retrospectively. The study included 125 subjects with 61 malignant (size: 3.9-36.9 mm, median: 13.4 mm) and 81 benign lesions (size: 4.8-43.8 mm, median: 12.0 mm), and 9 normal subjects. The cases in the two modalities were read independently by six experienced Mammography Quality Standards Act radiologists in a fully crossed counterbalanced manner. The readers were blinded to the prevalence of malignant, benign, or normal cases and were asked to assess the lesions based on the BI-RADS lexicon. The ratings were analyzed by the receiver operating characteristic methodology.

resultsLesion conspicuity was significantly higher (P << .0001) and fewer lesion margins were considered obscured in DBT. The mean area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the six readers increased significantly (P = .0001) from 0.783 (range: 0.723-0.886) for DM to 0.911 (range: 0.884-0.936) for DBT. Of the 366 ratings for malignant lesions, 343 on DBT and 278 on DM were rated as BI-RADS 4a and above. Of the 486 ratings for benign lesions, 220 on DBT and 206 on DM were rated as BI-RADS 4a and above. On average, 17.8% (65 of 366) more malignant lesions and 2.9% (14 of 486) more benign lesions would be recommended for biopsy using DBT. The inter-radiologist variability was reduced significantly.

conclusionWith DBT alone, the BI-RADS assessment of breast lesions and inter-radiologist reliability were significantly improved compared to DM.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overArea Under CurveBiopsyBreastBreast NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMammographyMiddle AgedObserver VariationReproducibility of ResultsRetrospective StudiesROC CurveBI-RADS assessmentDigital breast tomosynthesisROC observer study

Identifiers

PMID28647388
PMCPMC5651188

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.